{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_48275/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_48275","id":"gutenberg_48275","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48275","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Ancient","Category: History - Religious","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","History","History -- Philosophy"],"text":"THE\n                       PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY;\n\n\n                                IN A\n                        COURSE OF LECTURES,\n                        DELIVERED AT VIENNA,\n                     BY FREDERICK VON SCHLEGEL.\n\n\n                    TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN,\n                    WITH A MEMOIR OF THE AUTHOR,\n                  BY JAMES BURTON ROBERTSON, ESQ.\n\n\n                          IN TWO VOLUMES.\n                              VOL. II.\n\n\n                               LONDON\n                SAUNDERS AND OTLEY, CONDUIT STREET.\n                             MDCCCXXXV.\n\n\n\n\n                        B. BENSLEY, PRINTER.\n\n\n\n\n                              CONTENTS\n                            OF VOL. II.\n\n\n                             LECTURE X.\n\n  On the Christian point of view in the Philosophy of History.--The\n    origin of Christianity, considered in reference to the\n    political world.--Decline of the Roman Empire.                  1\n\n                            LECTURE XI.\n\n  Of the ancient Germans, and of the invasion of the Northern\n    tribes.--The march of Nature in the historical development\n    of Nations.--Further diffusion and internal consolidation of\n    Christianity.--Great corruption of the world.--Rise of\n    Mahometanism.                                                  40\n\n                            LECTURE XII.\n\n  Sketch of Mahomet and his religion.--Establishment of the\n   Saracenic Empire.--New organization of the European West,\n   and Restoration of the Christian Empire.                        78\n\n                           LECTURE XIII.\n\n  On the formation and consolidation of the Christian Government\n    in modern times.--On the principle which led to the\n    establishment of the old German Empire.                       117\n\n                           LECTURE XIV.\n\n  On the struggles of the Guelfs and Ghibellines.--Spirit of\n    the Ghibelline age.--Origin of romantic poetry and\n    art.--Character of the scholastic science and the old\n    jurisprudence.--Anarchical state of Western Europe.           152\n\n                            LECTURE XV.\n\n  General observations on the Philosophy of History. On the\n    corrupt state of society in the fifteenth century.--Origin\n    of Protestantism, and character of the times of the\n    Reformation.                                                  194\n\n                           LECTURE XVI.\n\n  Further development and extension of protestantism, in\n    the period of the religious wars, and subsequently\n    thereto.--On the different results of those wars in the\n    principal European countries.                                 228\n\n                           LECTURE XVII.\n\n  Parallel between the religious peace of Germany and that\n    of the other countries of Europe.--The political system\n    of the Balance of Power, and the principle of false\n    Illuminism prevalent in the eighteenth century.               268\n\n                           LECTURE XVIII.\n\n  On the general spirit of the age, and on the universal\n    Regeneration of Society.                                      300\n\n\n\n\n                       PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY.\n\n\n\n\n                            LECTURE X.\n\n\n     On the Christian point of view in the Philosophy of\n       History.--The origin of Christianity, considered in\n       reference to the political world.--Decline of the Roman\n       Empire.\n\n\nA regular history of the life of our Saviour, recounted like any other\nhistorical occurrence, would in my opinion be out of place in a\nphilosophy of history. The subject is either too vast for profane\nhistory, or in its first beginnings too obscure, whether we consider\nits internal importance, or in a mere historical point of view, its\noutward appearance. A thinking, and in his way well-thinking Roman,\nwhen he had obtained a more accurate knowledge of the life of our\nSaviour from the accounts of the Roman Procurator, or other Roman\ndignitaries in Palestine, might have expressed himself respecting the\nwhole transaction in the following terms: \"This is a very\nextraordinary man, endued with wonderful and divine power, [for such\nvague and general admiration might well be indulged in by a Heathen,\nwho yet adhered to the fundamental doctrines of his ancestral\nfaith,]--a man, who, he would continue to say, has produced a great\nmoral revolution in minds, and was, according to the most credible\ntestimony, of the purest character and most rigid morals, who taught\nmuch that was sublime on the immortality of the soul and the secrets\nof futurity; but who was accused by his enemies, and delivered over to\ndeath by his own people.\" Such, perhaps, would have been the judgment\nof a Tacitus, had he drawn his information from better and less\npolluted sources. So long however as all these transactions were\nconfined to the small province of Judea, the soundest and best\nconstituted Roman mind could have scarcely felt a more than passing\nregret at the perpetration of so signal an act of private injustice;\nand would, in other respects, have not regarded it as an event which\ncould, in a Roman point of view, be termed historical, or worthy to\noccupy a place in the more extended circle of his own world.\n\nIt was only when Christianity had become a power in the world--the\nprinciple of a new life, and of a new form of life totally differing\nfrom all preceding forms of existence, that it began to attract the\nattention of the Romans, as a remarkable historical occurrence. How\nperfectly unintelligible, strange and mysterious this mighty event at\nits origin, and for a long time afterwards, appeared to the Romans;\nhow erroneous and absurd were their opinions and conduct in regard to\nthe Christian religion, we have already shewn by some characteristic\nexamples.\n\nOn the other hand, when we view the whole transaction with the eye of\nfaith--when we consider all that has since grown up in the world out\nof beginnings apparently so small--the case changes its aspect in our\nregard; and we are then inclined to believe that the mysteries and\nmiracles of our Saviour's life and death, nay, the whole system of his\ndoctrine, which is intimately connected with those mysteries and\nmiracles, and is itself the greatest mystery and miracle, should be\nabandoned exclusively to religion, and, as they transcend the ordinary\nsphere of history, would be misplaced in a work of this nature. I will\ntherefore pre-suppose a knowledge of these sacred mysteries, and,\nwithout entering into any examination of them, will endeavour to\ndescribe the state of the world, and the aspect of society, when the\nChristian religion first made its appearance. A notice of some\nparticular points of doctrine, connected with politics and history,\neither in respect to the past or to the future, is by no means\nincompatible with my plan; but a complete examination of the whole\nsystem of Christian doctrines, as of any other great system of\ndoctrine or philosophy, would, for the reason I have alleged, be quite\nmisplaced in a work of this description. I will in the next place\nendeavour to shew the historical influence which this divine power has\nexerted, and point out how from its very origin, and still more in its\nprogress, it entirely renovated the face of the world.\n\nDoubtless the philosophy of history forms an essential part of the\nscience of divine and human things--things which in the mode of\nconceiving or treating them, should be rarely and even never entirely\nseparated. For how is it possible to attain to a just and correct\nknowledge of human things, in any department of life and science,\nunless they be viewed in relation to and connection with the divine\nprinciple, which animates or directs them? A certain medium, however,\nis to be observed, and the limits must be clearly and accurately\ntraced between divine and human things, lest the one department should\nbe confounded with the other. For as it is very prejudicial to\nreligion to make it merely a matter of learned historical research; so\nit is inconsistent with the object of historical philosophy to\ntransform it into a mere series of religious meditations. Undoubtedly\nhistorical philosophy can and ought to assume the divine principle in\nman--the divine image implanted in the human breast--as the great\npivot of human destiny, the main and essential point in universal\nhistory, and the restoration of that Image as the proper purpose of\nmankind.\n\nThus the philosophic historian may endeavour, as I have attempted, to\npoint out the divine truth contained in the primitive revelation, the\noriginal word which was current among the nations of the primitive\nage: in the second period of the world--the decisive crisis between\nancient and modern times--he will discover in the Christian religion,\nthe sole principle of the subsequent progress of mankind; and the\ndistinctive character and intellectual importance of the third or last\nepoch of the world, he will find only in that light, which, emerging\nfrom the primitive revelation, and the religion of love established by\nthe Redeemer, has shone ever clearer and brighter with the progress of\nages, and has changed and regenerated not only government and science,\nbut the whole system of human life. Here is the principle which\nfurnishes the plan of classification for all the great epochs of\nhistory. From this philosophic survey of history, the historian, in\nthe accomplishment of his task, may with great propriety point out and\nillustrate the ways and views of divine Providence in the conduct of\nparticular nations and ages, and in the destiny of remarkable\npersonages, or historical characters, when those views and ways are\nstrikingly perceptible to our feelings. Yet it is better that this\ntrain of observations should not be too systematically prosecuted, but\nshould be introduced occasionally only, and as it were episodically,\nin those passages of history, where such reflections naturally present\nthemselves; and they should ever be confined within the limits of a\nmodest suggestion; for all these reflections are only the esoteric\nspirit--the internal religious idea of history. Otherwise the\nhistorian will be exposed to the danger of introducing a system of\nProvidential designs prematurely formed according to human insight and\nhuman sagacity, into the yet unfinished drama of the world's history,\nwhose comprehensive vastness and hidden mysteries, besides, far exceed\nthe narrow limits of all that man can conceive, judge and know with\ncertainty. And this is a defect which many writers have not entirely\navoided in their otherwise very religious meditations on universal\nhistory. So far, however, as the historian confines his train of\nreflections within the modest limits of a mere partial explanation,\nand does not prematurely anticipate the general scheme of divine\npolity, or plunge too deeply, and with presumptuous confidence into\nits details; he will find much and obvious matter for such\nconsiderations, in the visible selection of particular individuals,\nand particular nations and even ages for the accomplishment of certain\nends, for the attainment on their part of prosperity, glory, or some\nhigh object in some particular sphere. But this power thus allotted to\nparticular individuals or to particular nations, exerts even at the\ntime a general influence on the fate of mankind, and evidently\naccomplishes the designs of Providence with regard to the world at\nlarge; forms a point of transition from past ages, or opens a passage\nto some manifestation of divine power, with respect to the future. In\nthe progress of human civilisation, such designs are frequently\nmanifest. Nay, on the great question of the permission of evil, when\nit exerts a widely destructive influence in the moral and physical\nworld, and on the views of God in that permission; the enlightened\nhistorian may sometimes succeed, if not in penetrating into the hidden\ndecrees of divine wisdom, yet at least in uplifting a corner of the\nmysterious veil which covers them. In particular phenomena of\nhistory--such for example as the destruction of a whole nation, the\nJews for instance; or in the overwhelming calamities, the general\nmiseries inflicted on a corrupt age, manifesting, clearly as they do,\nthe retributive justice of God--calamities which, when regarded from\nthis point of view (and it is only from this point of view they can be\nrightly judged), appear like a partial judgment of the world--in all\nsuch historical phenomena, a modest reference to the final causes of\nsuch events may be exceedingly appropriate. This idea of divine\njustice, and of God's judgments on the world exemplified in history,\nbelongs undoubtedly to the province of historical philosophy; and, as\nman's resemblance to his Maker constitutes the first foundation-stone\nof history, this more practical principle, relating as it does, to\nreal life and all its mighty phenomena, forms the second.\n\nBut the Mystery of grace in the divine Redemption of mankind,\ntranscends the sphere of profane history. The Christian philosophy of\nhistory must indeed tacitly pre-suppose the truth of that mystery, and\nassume it as known, and indeed as self-evident to all well-thinking\npersons--it must even, under the inspiration of this faith, refer to\nit very many, the greater part, indeed almost all, of the facts and\nphenomena of history--but it should forbear to introduce it into its\nown province, and should leave it to the sanctuary of religion. In the\nsame way, whenever philosophy attempts to incorporate and rank this\nmystery with her own speculative conceptions, the consequence must\never be hurtful to religion; for, as philosophy thus attempts to\nexplain and, as it were, deduce this mystery from her own\nspeculations, the mystery of Redemption ceases to be a divine fact,\nand it is only as such that it is and can be the true and eternal\nfoundation of religion. I wish here expressly to do away with an\nopinion which is completely unhistorical, and even subversive of all\nhistory. I cannot more truly and succintly designate this opinion,\nthan by stating it as follows:--Christ, to say it in one word, was a\nJewish Socrates; and this purest, noblest, and sublimest of all\nethical teachers (according to the rationalists' interpretation of his\nhistory) met with a fate no less deplorable for mankind than that\nwhich befel the Athenian philosopher, and the wisest of all the\nGrecian sages. In reply to this, one observation only need be\nmade--_If Christ were not more than a Socrates, then a_ _Socrates He\nwas not._[1] But this opinion is not only unhistorical, or, to speak\nmore properly, _anti-historical_, because it is in utter opposition\nto all covenants, testimonies, authentic records, and even Christ's\nexpress declarations; but fully as much, and even still more on this\naccount, that if we once remove this divine keystone in the arch of\nuniversal history, the whole fabric of the world's history falls to\nruin--for its only foundation is this new manifestation of God's power\nin the crisis of time--this hope in God abiding unto the end. For,\nalthough I do not consider a formal demonstration of the truth of the\nChristian religion as falling within the province of profane history;\nyet the belief of its truth--a faith in its dogmas, is the only clue\nin such investigations. Without this faith, the whole history of the\nworld would be nought else than an insoluble enigma--an inextricable\nlabyrinth--a huge pile of the blocks and fragments of an unfinished\nedifice--and the great tragedy of humanity would remain devoid of all\nproper result.\n\nConfining myself within those limits which the very nature of the\nsubject, and the force of circumstances prescribe, and which I have\nhere thought it necessary to mark out with exactness, I shall now, in\norder to see under what circumstances Christianity first arose in the\nworld, and appeared on the domain of history, direct your attention\nmore immediately to the Jewish state.\n\nDependant at first on the Grecian dynasty of Egypt, and at a\nsubsequent period subdued by the Soverigns of the new Syrian monarchy,\nwhich sprang out of the dismemberment of the Macedonian empire, the\nmore virtuous portion of the Hebrew people evinced under the religious\npersecution they had to sustain from the latter monarchs, much\nconstancy in the old faith of their fathers; for which indeed several\nof the heroic family of the Maccabees had the courage to lay down\ntheir lives. From these rulers they were rescued by the Romans, who\ntook them under their powerful protection, which, with the Jews, as\nwith all other nations, was soon transformed into a systematic and\nvery oppressive domination. The Jewish people were so far involved in\nthe civil war between C\u00e6sar and Pompey, that each party favoured that\naspirant to the throne of Judea, most favourable to its own designs.\nUnder the monarchy of Augustus, Herod, who was created tributary\nsovereign of Palestine about forty years before the Christian \u00e6ra, was\nthe last who had been promoted to sovereignty amid this conflict of\nparties. The temple of Jerusalem, that had been rebuilt with the\npermission of Cyrus, still remained in all its pomp and grandeur. If a\nprofane curiosity had tempted Crassus and Pompey to intrude within its\nsanctuary, on the other hand, the munificence of Herod had added to\nits size and increased its decorations. Although Herod ever retained a\npartiality for Roman customs, and still more for Grecian opinions, yet\nthe temple of Jerusalem considered, not as the august sanctuary of\nHeaven's revelations to the chosen people, but as the centre of\nattraction for the Jewish nation, situated as it was in the midst of a\ngreat commercial city, (one of the largest in all Western Asia), and\nforming at once the treasury, and by its close proximity to the\ncitadel, the rampart, of the city and of the state, must have been\nregarded by Herod as the seat of his power, and the nearest object of\nhis ambition. There were at that period among the Jews two parties,\nwhich, like those of the Patricians and Plebeians in the civil wars of\nRome, bear some resemblance to the parties that at present divide the\nworld: although in their relative position towards each other, as well\nas in their internal character and tendency, there are many important\npoints which distinguish them from the parties at present existing.\nThough from the predominant spirit and peculiar constitution of the\nJewish people, the subjects of contention between the two parties\nrelated chiefly or more immediately to matters of religion; yet\npolitics were not entirely excluded from their disputes, which\nembraced in general the whole of human life and its various relations.\nThe Pharisees were the chief scribes and doctors of the law, and in\nthe state, the honoured Patricians of the Hebrews, who sought to\nmaintain the ancient faith and ancient constitution of their country\nwith its rights and jurisprudence, adhering indeed with a rigid\nscupulosity, and a contentious subtilty to the letter of the old law,\nwhile they had long forgotten its divine spirit, and were notorious\nfor their attachment to their own interests, their selfish feelings,\nand false and contracted views. As they acknowledged, and respected\nwith the most scrupulous fidelity all existing laws, they sided,\napparently at least, with the Romans; though they never entertained a\ncordial attachment for those conquerors; and indeed they ever\ncherished the hope of being able to ensnare the great Teacher, so\nbeloved by the Jewish people, into a declaration against the Roman\nrule, as in their limited views they conceived He must, sooner or\nlater, be necessarily driven to that expedient in order to sustain his\npopularity. But it cannot be doubted that the cause which the\nPharisees defended was, on the whole, the legitimate cause of the\nHebrews of that period, since our Saviour himself expressly\nacknowledged this, when he said of the Pharisees,--\"They sit in the\nchair of Moses, and whatsoever they command you, that do ye.\" It was\nprecisely because they had made the old law, and the cause of God,\ntheir own cause, that so much was exacted of them; and that they were\njudged with so much severity by our Saviour, apparently with greater\nseverity than were the Sadducees themselves, who by an Epicurean\nphilosophy, and a latitudinarian system of morals, had fallen almost\nentirely from the faith, had affixed a mere human interpretation to\nScripture, and had even called in question the doctrine of the\nimmortality of the soul. If in this sect there were individuals\nentertaining purer and more exalted notions of the truth, we must\nregard them rather as happy and honorable exceptions. We must not,\nbesides, forget that the severe judgments on the Pharisees, which\noccur in Scripture, refer only to the more degenerate among them,--a\ngreat portion, doubtless, perhaps the greater part; but by no means\ninclude the whole sect or body, among whom were many worthy\nindividuals.\n\nWe ought also to recollect that the apostle Paul was a Pharisee, and\nthough a well-intentioned, yet a very zealous, one, for all his\nwritings shew the man who had sat at the feet of Gamaliel: the latter\nagain was the grandson of the illustrious Hillel, who is named as one\nof the last great doctors of the Hebrews, who was profoundly versed\nin their sacred traditions, and was indeed one of the last pillars of\nthe Synagogue. The Jewish history or tradition mentions seven species\nof false Pharisees, to whom all the reproaches of our Saviour are\nperfectly applicable. Many other Pharisees, besides the apostle Paul,\nare mentioned with honour in Holy Writ, as friends and disciples of\nour Redeemer, though they had not the courage openly to declare\nthemselves his followers.\n\nWhenever, in the history of mankind, we arrive at some epoch of great\ncrisis, or momentous collision, we find invariably, and in all\ncountries, two contending parties like these, appearing at once on the\nhistorical arena, though in forms or positions variously modified. The\nparty defending antiquity, often adheres only to the dead letter of\nrigid law, forgetting its inward sense and living spirit; while the\nopposite party, which has a strong conviction that the world stands in\nneed of a new legislation, and that the epoch of a new legislation\napproaches, is not entirely in the wrong. But when the members of the\nlatter party have lost all faith in the sacred traditions of the past,\nand have consequently forgotten that the great work of regeneration\ncan emanate from God only; they conceive that it is in their power to\naccomplish this work, nay, they fancy they have already succeeded in\ntheir enterprise, while all their futile attempts can accomplish\nnought but a total revolution in the past--a revolution brought about\neither by external violence, or, in its best and mildest form, by the\ninternal ruin of moral principle and feeling. Between these extreme\nand conflicting parties, individuals are often found who fly from the\nfield of contention, and seek out a higher asylum, at least for\nthemselves. Such were those small communities of holy contemplatives\nthat then existed among the Jews, the Essenians in Palestine, and the\nTherapunt\u00e6 in Egypt; but these ascetics, limited in number, formed a\ntrifling exception by the side of the two great predominant sects. It\nwas between these two leading parties--on one hand, the narrow-minded\nand selfish Jewish legitimatists--stiff adherents to the letter of the\nlaw,--and, on the other hand, the liberal illumin\u00e9s;--between the old\npromises and expectations of the Hebrews, and the Roman dominion, now\nbecome and acknowledged to be legitimate, that our Saviour had to\nsteer; and it required a more than human prudence to traverse this\ncritical period, unaffected by the spirit of contending factions.\n\"Give unto C\u00e6sar what belongs to C\u00e6sar,\" was his simple declaration,\nwhen men sought to entrap him by their worldly cunning: and this\ndeclaration has remained a fundamental precept of Christianity, and\nwill continue unchanged to the end of time. So will that other oracle,\n\"Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build my church;\" in this\nthere is a clear and distinct precept how Christians were to treat\nthose Pagan pretensions of the Romans which regarded acts of\npolitical idolatry, such as the sacrifice before the image of the\nEmperor, and acts of a similar kind; and how, as witnesses of the\ntruth, against all the powers of earth, they were to seal their\ntestimony with their blood. The capital error of the Jews lay in this,\nthat in the Deliverer, promised to them of old, they now generally\nexpected an earthly liberator destined to emancipate them from the\noppressive yoke of the Romans, and to restore their national empire to\nits highest glory and splendour. And, indeed, had they not carried\ntheir notions on this point to such extreme lengths, and with such\nunyielding obstinacy, much might have been alleged in their excuse.\nAccording to the usual character of prophetic speech, the portrait of\na spiritual Deliverer, invested with real glory and pomp, had been\ndrawn in such vivid colours in those ancient prophecies, that the\ndescription might, in many passages at least, be easily mistaken for\none of an earthly monarch. Or, to express my meaning with greater\naccuracy and precision, as it is the peculiar character of sacred\nprophecy to represent events about to follow, in immediate contact\nwith the ultimate objects to which they tend, there are often in those\nprophetic descriptions of the future prosperity of the chosen people,\nmany passages on the remote period of the last ages of the world, and\non the universal triumph of Christianity throughout the earth at the\nend of time; there are often, we say, many of those passages which\nalso refer and indeed contain the closest allusions to the\ncommencement of the Christian redemption. In the same way, although in\na different sort of subject, we see our Saviour himself foretell the\nimpending ruin of Jerusalem and of the Jewish nation, while his\nlamentations are closely linked, and almost confounded with, prophetic\nwarnings respecting the awful and terrific scenes of latter times, and\nthe approaching day of general account; although both these events,\nthe ruin of the temporal Jerusalem, and the last glorious\ntransformation of nature, when creation shall be consummated, and a\nnew heaven and a new earth shall spring into existence, are to be\nstrictly regarded as real and historical. So close an attention, and\nso great a power of discrimination are requisite to distinguish\nbetween parts, to combine the whole, and place each particular fact in\nits proper point of view. But the best excuse that can be offered for\nthe Jews, in this respect, is the fact, as the scripture clearly\nshoweth, that all the followers of our Saviour, and his most trusty\ndisciples, were at first under the same delusion, and for a long time\nbelieved that, though the right moment had not yet arrived, still\ntheir master would certainly appear as the earthly Deliverer and\nMonarch of his nation; and indeed the idea of his sufferings and death\nwas so abhorrent to their feelings, that they even dared to express\ntheir disapprobation, and upbraid their Saviour for entertaining such\nthoughts; for it was only at a much later period the bandage fell\nfrom their eyes. And the great reproach which we are to make the Jews\nis that they should have adhered with such obstinacy to an error, very\nexcusable under certain circumstances, and that after all they had\nheard, seen and experienced, they should have still closed their eyes\nagainst the light. The conduct of our Saviour towards the Jews is\noften represented in a manner little conformable to historic truth,\nand to the spirit and character of this mighty revolution, when it is\nsaid that he entirely abrogated the whole system of the Mosaic law.\nThe outward scaffolding was indeed removed, when it had ceased to be\nnecessary; such were all those laws which applied only to that state\nof strict separation from Heathen nations, which at an earlier period\nhad been of such absolute importance. Very many things were still\nretained; and all now received in the fulfilment a higher spiritual\nsignification; and this was natural, when we consider that in Judaism\nitself every thing which had not been designed merely for local and\ntemporary wants, from the very commencement of that dispensation, was\ntypical of Christianity. The twelve apostles, as well as the first\nseventy-two disciples, were taken exclusively from the chosen people,\nand even, in this respect, the divine promises were completely\nfulfilled, and literally observed. The constitution of the ancient\nhierarchy has very evidently furnished the pattern for that of the\nChristian priesthood; though this of course has been adapted to the\nwider circle of a higher and more spiritual system. The expression,\n\"My kingdom is not _of_ this world,\" does not imply that it was\nnot to be _in_ this world a real and effective power, with a form\nand organization clearly defined. Many have read so much, or inferred\nso much, from this declaration, that they could not adopt an easier or\nmore polite method of shutting out this divine empire of truth from\nthe world. In the hours of the greatest solemnity, the divine Master\nrevealed to his disciples the hidden sense of the ancient revelation\nin all the plenitude of its mysteries. As the Saviour himself said\nthat every word and syllable of the old law must be literally\nfulfilled; as in general the spiritual interpretation of the divine\noracles is by no means inconsistent with their literal truth and\ninviolable sanctity; so the same remark will apply to the new\nrevelation, in which every word and every syllable of prophecy will\nreceive a full and practical accomplishment before the consummation of\ntime. Even in another point of view, particularly worthy the\nconsideration of the historian, Christianity must be regarded only as\na divine continuation, a higher and more expansive form, or spiritual\nrenovation, of the Mosaic institution; and was so intended by its\ndivine Founder; namely in those aspirations after futurity, which now\nso exclusively directed the whole of human life, and its various\nviews.\n\nThat law of divine wisdom, by which earthly existence is to be looked\nupon only as a state of expectation, of preparation, and of\nstruggle--a view of life alone accordant with human nature--that law\nhas retained its full force in the new covenant. For the primitive\nChristians, death was what the Saviour said of himself, a return, a\npassing unto the Father, but life was one ceaseless struggle. For him\nwho unto the end fought steadfast in this struggle, the angel of death\nwas divested of his terrors; he was a celestial messenger of peace,\nthat brought to the Christian the bright garland of victory, and the\ncrown of eternal life; in this faith and in these sentiments, did the\nSaints live, and the martyrs die. And as every human soul is conducted\nto the realms above by the gentle hand of its divine guardian; so the\nSaviour himself has announced to all mankind, in many prophetic\npassages, that when the period of the dissolution of the world shall\napproach, he himself will return to the earth, will renovate the face\nof all things, and bring them to a close. So lively an assurance had\nthe first Christians of the immediate presence of their invisible lord\nand guide, so vivid a hope did they entertain of his speedy return to\nthe earth; that, in order to check the aspirations of a zeal that\nwould accelerate the period of consummation so ardently desired,\ndivine Providence judged it necessary that the Prophet of the New\nTestament should close the volume of eternal revelation with that long\nsuccession of ages that were to witness the progressive struggle of\nhumanity--all those centuries of Christianity that mankind was yet to\ntraverse, before the promise should be fulfilled, and in the fulness\nof time the final and universal triumph of Christianity throughout the\nearth should be accomplished, for all mankind must be gathered into\none fold, and under one Shepherd. According to the spirit and precept\nof the Christian religion, man must at every moment be prepared; but\nhe must not, in a presumptuous ardour, accelerate the term of\nexistence fixed by the wisdom of Almighty God. Thus all those\nChristians who, during the times of the most violent persecution of\nthe church under the Romans, courted the danger, and would not await\nthe honour of martyrdom, were warned that such conduct was by no means\nconformable to the will of God; as it often happened that those who,\nby such an overweening confidence in their own strength, had wantonly\nrushed to the field of danger, succumbed under their torments, and\nfell from the faith.\n\nHad the Jews but opened their eyes in the right time; had they\nacknowledged the divine fulfilment of ancient promises in the mission\nof Christ, which was in fact far more exalted and more splendid than\nany thing they had expected; and had all, or even the greater part, of\nthe nation embraced Christianity; they would have become the mighty\nstem--the great foundation--the central point of all modern history,\nand all modern life. But as they did not correspond to this call of\ndivine Providence, a call fully justified by their circumstances,\ntheir early history, and the prerogatives which the Almighty had once\naccorded to them above all other nations; the justice of God required\nthat they should now receive a signal chastisement, that they should\nbe deprived of their national existence, dispersed among all the\nnations of the earth; and that, in this state of ruin and dispersion,\nthey should serve as a memorable example to the world. But this\nhumiliation of the Jews, which was calculated to draw down the\ncontempt of the Heathen, who looked only to outward things, should\nhave never given rise to oppression or ill-treatment among Christian\nnations; and the more so, as it is still a problem whether any other\npeople placed in a similar situation, and warped by selfish\nprejudices, and old and deep rooted errors, would have done better; or\nwhether mankind in general, subjected to a similar trial, would have\ncome off more successfully.\n\nThe old temple of the holy city was not, like the idolatrous temples\nof the Heathens, a mere magnificent monument of national glory,\nadorned with all the splendour of art; but the idea and plan of the\nwhole structure, its minutest parts, every stone, and every cipher,\nwere clearly indicative and profoundly symbolical of that invisible\ntemple, that mighty city, that divine kingdom of peace, which Christ\nwas to establish on earth, and which he had now at length come to\nestablish. Even the name of Jerusalem, according to the Hebrew\nsignification of the word, has the emblematic sense of revelation and\nfoundation, or city of peace, by which is understood not a mere\nearthly and transitory peace, but that higher and divine peace which\nforms the subject of all the promises made unto the chosen people.\nThis prophetic sense and typical design of the holy city is so closely\nconnected with the origin and whole idea of the city, that in some\npassages of the Old Testament such figurative expressions are used, as\nif the whole business, nay the whole life, of man had no other object\n\"than to build up the walls of Jerusalem;\" in the same sense as if a\nChristian moralist were to say; the proper end and ultimate object of\nmankind, and of the history of all nations and ages, is the kingdom of\nGod, that is to say, the ever wider diffusion and firmer consolidation\nof Christian truth and Christian perfection throughout the world. When\nthe spiritual and internal sense of this mighty and historical\nhieroglyph of the Jewish people was no longer understood; when the\nmighty truths which it embodied, at the very moment they were about to\nreceive their full explanation and perfect development, were\nmisunderstood and rejected; what was more natural than that the\nemblem, which had lost its meaning, should be effaced, the temple\ndestroyed, and the city itself levelled and razed by the arm of divine\njustice? This is the view which the Christian historian must take of\nthat mighty and fearful catastrophe which now befell Jerusalem, and\nthe whole Jewish people under Vespasian; and indeed the impression\nwhich this event made on the Jews, though somewhat diversified by\nnational sentiments, is in all essential points conformable to our own\nfeelings. That in every such widely destructive disaster, which by\ndivine permission may afflict any portion of the human race, the\nloving wisdom of God will know how to take each individual soul under\nits special protection, and will guard and spare it, at least, in its\nimmortal part, is a truth so evident to every religious mind, that it\nis unnecessary to enforce it at any length. If, as the Scripture\nsaith, \"the hairs on a man's head are numbered,\" so will each day, nay\neach hour, each pulsation of human existence be counted; yea, every\nheartfelt tear the eye of sorrow shall shed, will be reckoned by the\nguardian spirit of eternal love. But this religious regard for the\nfate of individuals, and this humane sympathy with their misfortunes,\nmust be kept within its proper sphere in historical disquisitions,\nwhere the principal design is to study and observe, as far as the\nlimited perception of man will permit, the mighty course of divine\njustice, through all ages of the world.\n\nWhen the Jews were disappointed in the hope they had entertained of a\nliberator, who was to be sent from above, armed with divine power to\ndeliver them from the stern yoke of Roman domination; exasperated by\nthe ever increasing tyranny of their masters, after several partial\ninsurrections, the whole nation, three and thirty years after the\ndeath of our Lord, broke out into open rebellion; and the whole\ncountry, torn by infuriated factions, which fanatic hate inspired with\nthe courage of despair, exhibited all the horrors of the most terrific\nrevolution. The savage warfare of the Romans in such a deadly\nstruggle, we have already learned from the example of Carthage; for\nhowever mild and benevolent might be the personal character of Titus,\nit was out of his power to introduce any change in the system of war;\nand the number of men that perished in the siege and ravage of the\nholy city is estimated at 1,300,000; including the small number that\nwere led away captives, or reserved to grace the triumph of the\nconqueror. The Emperor Hadrian rebuilt the city, which had been\ntotally destroyed, under the new and Pagan name of \u00c6lia Capitolina,\nand even erected within it a temple to Jupiter: but no Jew was\npermitted to enter within its walls. At a later period the Emperor\nJulian had intended to re-establish the Jews in their ancient city,\nand in all probability it was his hostility to Christianity which had\ninspired him with the design; but unexpected events and physical\nobstacles[2] opposed the execution of this plan.\n\nThe Jewish covenant and the old revelation of the Hebrews formed the\nchief corner-stone on which Christianity was founded; and the first\napostles of the new religion were all chosen from among that people.\nThe scriptures of the new covenant were composed in the Greek tongue,\nand the first apologies, and other expositions of faith, or books of\ninstruction by the primitive fathers, were mostly written in the same\nlanguage. We may therefore consider this language as forming the\nsecond foundation-stone of the Christian edifice. Though the political\nconsequences of the Macedonian conquests in Asia were not of any\npermanence, yet the influence which these conquests have exerted on\nthe intellectual character of nations, the ascendancy which they gave\nto the Greeks over the whole civilized world of that period, were by\nno means unimportant. It was by means of these conquests that the\nphilosophy and literature of the Greeks became, along with their\nlanguage, predominant in Egypt and the Western countries of Asia; and\nhence this language was adopted as the original tongue of\nChristianity; because no other at that period had attained such\nintellectual refinement, or such general diffusion. As in human\nsociety every class and condition of life, nay, every individual, by\nthe peculiar rights and advantages which each exclusively enjoys,\nstill serves the community, and contributes to the weal of others,\nunconsciously and without precisely wishing it; so in the history of\nthe world, and in the progress of nations, all things are closely\ninterlinked, and one serves as the instrument, auxiliary, or bond of\nunion to the other; and it was not one of the least important results\nof the Greek science and language, that the two points wherein that\nnation had risen to the greatest eminence, and was endowed with the\ngreatest power, should both have been so nearly allied with the cause\nof Christianity, even from its origin. The Roman empire was the third\nfoundation-stone of the Christian religion; for its vast extent\nfacilitated in a singular manner the early and very rapid diffusion of\nChristianity, and formed indeed the ground-work on which the fabric of\nthe new church was first constructed.\n\nIn the history of the primitive church, historians are wont to\nseparate the different branches of their subject, which form so many\ndifferent parts of a single whole, and thus to describe separately the\ndogmas and doctrines of the church, its holy rites and sacraments, its\nliturgies and festivals, and next its moral condition and external\nrelations; and this division of the subject may, no doubt, very well\nanswer the special design of such ecclesiastical histories. But if we\nwish to take a more general view of the subject, to seize the spirit\nof Christianity, and form a just, true and lively conception of the\nprimitive church, we must be particularly careful not to forget in the\ninvestigation of those several heads, that they formed one undivided\nand living whole in the eyes of the first Christians, amid the\noverflowing fulness of a new moral life; and of this spirit of unity,\nas well as of the wonderful energy of faith and love which was its\nnever-failing source, it is almost impossible for us to form a full\nand adequate notion. Christianity in its primitive influence, was like\nan electric stroke, which traversed the world with the rapidity of\nlightning--like a magnetic fluid of life, which united even the most\ndistant members of humanity in one animating pulsation. Public prayer\nand the sacred mysteries formed a stronger and closer bond of love\namong men, than the still sacred ties of kindred and earthly\naffection. Some persons have affected to compare the secret assemblies\nof the primitive Christians with the pagan Mysteries; and undoubtedly\nit was only in secret, and in the retired and obscure oratory, that\nthe first followers of Christ could gather together amid the fury of\ngeneral persecution. But, from a competent knowledge which we possess\nof the import of those pagan Mysteries, they had about as much\nresemblance to the religious assemblies of the primitive Christians,\nas the divine sacrifice of holy commemoration, and the chalice\nconsecrated with the blood of the eternal Covenant, bore to the human\nsacrifices of the Cainites. The Christians saw and felt the presence\nof their invisible King and eternal Lord; and when their souls\noverflowed with the plenitude of spiritual and heavenly life, how\ncould they value earthly existence, and how must they not have been\nwilling to sacrifice it in the struggle against the powers of\ndarkness; for that struggle formed the whole and proper business of\ntheir lives?--Hence we can understand the reason of the otherwise\nincredibly rapid diffusion of Christianity through all the provinces,\nand even sometimes beyond the limits, of the vast empire of\nRome;--like a heavenly flame, it ran through all life, kindling, where\nit found congenial sympathy, all that it touched into a kindred\nfervour. Hence, along with that mighty spirit of love which produced\nso rapid a spread of the Christian religion, and which united in the\nclosest bonds the first Christian communities, that energy of faith\nwhich inspired such heroic fortitude under the dreadful and oft\nrenewed persecutions of the Romans. The first persecution under Nero\nwas only a momentary freak of blood-thirsty tyranny--a passing trait\nof that monster's cruelty. The first regular edict against the\nChristians in the Roman empire was passed by Domitian in the 87th year\nof our era, and, according to a custom which had been borrowed from\nthe Jews, he assimilated the offence of dissent from the national\nreligion to the crime of high treason. The better Nerva softened the\nrigour of this law, and declared that the denunciations of slaves\nagainst their masters were not to be received, but, on the contrary,\nsuch informers were to be severely punished. Trajan also, on the\nbefore-mentioned report of the younger Pliny, decided, in the 120th\nyear of our era, that the Christians, who were then uncommonly\nnumerous, were not to be sought after, but that, when denounced, they\nshould be punished according to the law existing against such\nreligious associations and communities. But notwithstanding all these\napparent mitigations of severity introduced by the better emperors,\nthe criminal jurisprudence of the Romans, like their foreign warfare,\never remained most atrocious; and the passages and allusions which are\nto be found in ancient historians, concur with the general voice of\nChristian tradition in stating the prodigious cruelties inflicted on\nthe Christians in those persecutions. In general Hadrian pursued that\nmilder and middle course of policy which Trajan had commenced before\nhim; he approved of legal and judicial persecutions against the\nChristians, but he strictly prohibited those tumultuary attacks which\nwere the mere ebullitions of popular hatred. With many vicissitudes,\nChristianity remained in this state until the reign of Diocletian,\nwho, pursuing a far more systematic plan than most of his\npredecessors, attempted entirely to root it out; but this was no\nlonger possible, and the growing church received its first formal\nedict of pacification at the hands of the emperor Constantine. The\npagan enthusiast Julian attempted a second time to subvert it, but it\nwas now too late. In the struggle against pagan cruelty and Roman\npersecution, Christianity had come off victorious; in bondage, and\nunder every species of suffering, it had proved the invincible might\nof the divine arm;--and, next to the apostles, the martyrs, so highly\nrevered by the gratitude of Christians, must occupy the second place\namong those who were instrumental in bringing about this mighty\nrenovation of society, and who sealed their efforts with their blood.\nBut we must not imagine that the martyrs, as mere men, and by their\nunassisted strength, could have endured such dreadful torments with\nsuch unshaken constancy; or, again, that they were the mere\nunconscious instruments of a divine fatality, without the co-operation\nof their free, clear and steadfast will. By the side of those who were\nconstant, many individuals were found that were not so,--many, who,\novercome by suffering, delivered up the holy scriptures, or entirely\napostatized from the faith and sacrificed to idols; so that it was\nafterwards a matter of dispute, how far the _lapsed_ could be\npardoned and received again into the church.\n\nAfter that period was past which had witnessed the reign of those\ninhuman tyrants that immediately succeeded Augustus, several of the\nmore virtuous emperors sought by various expedients to bring about the\nmoral regeneration of the people and empire of Rome. Trajan, who\npossessed much of the rectitude and old martial virtues that belonged\nto the elder and better period of Rome, sought to introduce these\nagain; and, though the effects of his policy were transient, they\nwere still beneficial. Hadrian endeavoured to reanimate paganism, and\nto make it once more the basis of the empire and of public life; for\nthis purpose, he had recourse especially to the more profound and\naustere Theology of Egypt; and that new Egyptian style, which\ncharacterizes the later monuments of Roman art, was connected with the\nemperor's predilection for the old religion of Egypt. But the healthy\nvigour, the moral regeneration, of public life, and of the empire\nitself, could not now be obtained by the maintenance, or firmer\nconsolidation, of the pagan religion; on the contrary, it is in the\nerroneous nature of the primitive paganism of Rome that we must seek\nfor the principal cause why, even in that elder period now so highly\nextolled, and which certainly was at least better, a true, pure, and\nstable system of morals and politics could never take root and\nflourish. Under the two Antonines, the severe morality of Stoicism was\nregarded as the vital principle of moral regeneration, and political\nreform, and a practical application of its principles was sought for\non all sides. And certainly if the stoical philosophy, with its mere\ndead letter of rigid justice, and correct morality, unsupported by the\ndivine maxims of right faith, and that spirit of exalted love which\ntrue faith alone can impart, could have accomplished this high\ndesign;--if it had possessed within itself this mighty source, this\ncreative energy of moral and social life; the serious determination and\npersonal virtues of those imperial stoics might indeed have promised\nto the declining age of Rome the fulfilment of the last hope to which\nPaganism yet clung. But that which doth not rest on the basis of truth\ncan receive no life from any external cause; and it can impart no life\nto any thing without, because it is decayed within, and when the\nillusive bloom of first youth has fled, it sinks inevitably into its\nnative corruption. \"When the Lord doth not build the house,\" saith the\nPsalmist, \"those who would build it labour in vain.\" To the better\ntimes that had witnessed the rule of the three or four great monarchs\nwe have mentioned, the reign of a Commodus succeeded; and thus the\nEmpire, down to the time of Diocletian, beheld a constant mutation of\nrulers, sometimes benevolent, or at least comparatively good, whose\nreigns however were often but of short duration, sometimes weak and\nspiritless, and sometimes again tyrants of the most abject and\natrocious cast. Among these latter Sovereigns, however, who in cruelty\nand arbitrary caprice, resembled the first successors of Augustus,\nthere were no characters possessed of that strong Roman sense which\ndistinguished Tiberius; and the empire in their hands assumed daily\nmore and more a thoroughly effeminate and oriental complexion.\n\nNothing was more subject to chance than the right of succession in the\nRoman empire, where the arbitrary application of the Roman principle\nof adoption opened a wide field to the contention of parties; without\nincluding the frequent recurrence of conspiraces in a military empire,\nwhich, as it was formed by a military conspiracy, ever retained the\nstamp of its origin. Augustus had employed his whole life, not without\napparent success, for a time at least, in endeavouring to give to\nauthority, acquired by force of arms, the colour and forms of\nlegitimacy. But how could it be ever forgotten that he, as well as\nC\u00e6sar, had been raised to the Imperial throne by the army, and amid\nthe struggles of factions, conspiracies, and civil wars. The soldiers\nknew this, and recollected but too well the source whence the supreme\npower in the state had emanated. The influence of the Pr\u00e6torians,\nespecially, was, from their origin, very considerable, as they\nsurrounded the Emperor, and formed his body-guard. By virtue of his\noffice the leader of the Pr\u00e6torians had a sort of negative and\ncontrolling power, like that of the Censor and popular Tribune in the\nancient republic, except that this functionary wielded the sword,--a\npower in some degree acknowledged by the Emperor himself, as it was\naccounted one of the highest merits of Trajan, that to the chief of\nthat troop which defended the person, and often decided the fate, of\nthe Emperor, he delivered the sword with these words: \"For me, if I\ngovern well--against me, if I should become a tyrant.\"\n\nThus the empire was entirely abandoned to chance and caprice, and as\nits origin was military, it remained unto the end essentially a\nmilitary despotism. The more powerful legions that were quartered in\nthe most important provinces, especially in those of the frontiers,\nsoon began to feel that they were far superior in numbers and strength\nto the effeminate Pr\u00e6torians of the capital. Several emperors were\nelected and proclaimed by these legions; and in the number, such even\nas were not Romans, and were of barbarian extraction; for it happened\nthat, in the provincial legions, many foreigners, especially Germans,\nwere engaged in the Roman service in the provinces on the\nNorth-western frontier. Several of the emperors thus chosen by the\nlegions, continued to reside where the centre of their power\nexisted--in the station, or in some provincial capital conveniently\nsituated. The Senate had long been but a mere shadow of its former\ngreatness; even the capital began to lose much of its importance.\n\nAt the same time the repeated incursions of the Northern nations ever\nrendered a general invasion more imminent, and the disaster, which men\nhad foreseen from afar, appeared ever nearer its accomplishment.\nAlready the first irruption of the Cimbri and Teutones, when not\nmerely an army for the sake of booty, or to plant a military colony,\nbut a whole tribe with wives and children had migrated into the Roman\nterritory, threw Rome into consternation during the civil wars, when\nshe was at the very height of her military prowess. C\u00e6sar had spared\nno exertion to reduce Gaul to complete subjection, and this country\nhad ever since adopted more and more the language and customs of Rome.\nHe experienced from no people such vigorous resistance, as from the\nGermanic tribes; and to protect against these nations the safety of\nthe empire, by strongly fortifying the banks of the Rhine and Danube,\nconstituted afterwards the first concern of the Roman Emperors. What a\nshock Augustus received from the defeat of Varus, by the German\nArminius in his native woods! Even under the martial Trajan, who was\nalmost the last conqueror in the line of Roman Emperors, men began to\nentertain serious apprehensions of the invasion of the Germanic\ntribes. The first great irruption was that of the Alemanni, who, under\nMarcus Aurelius burst into the Rh\u00e6tian provinces, while similar\nmovements occurred in Noricum and eastward towards Pannonia. However,\nMarcus Aurelius, by an energetic and successful resistance, repelled\nthis first attempt, and thus was the means of deterring the barbarians\nfor a long time from similar enterprises; and a hundred years elapsed\nbefore Aurelian drove them again from Italy, over the Alps as far as\nthe Lech. Among the German nations, the Goths, who from the\nScandinavian Isles had penetrated far into the interior of Germany,\nparticularly towards the eastern, as afterwards towards the western,\nparts of that country, were pre-eminent in power. They could not be\nprevented from obtaining a firm footing in the North-eastern\nprovinces, by the Black Sea. The Emperor Decius perished in the war\nagainst this people; and the Romans were obliged to surrender to them\nby a formal treaty, the further Dacia. Constantine, indeed, was\nvictorious in the war he waged against them; but he preferred to\nconclude an advantageous peace, to gain their friendship, and enlist\ntheir youth in the service of the Roman armies. Of the later reigns\nthat of Diocletian displayed the greatest energy; but his cruel\npersecution of the Christians was, even to judge from the mere\nexternal state of society, as little adapted to the spirit of the age\nas it was reprehensible in itself, and hence his design remained\nunaccomplished. Although, after his abdication, Diocletian showed\nhimself a thorough Roman in private life, yet, while he swayed the\nsceptre, he deemed it expedient to surround the throne with all the\npomp and forms of Asiatic homage. The division of the empire among\nseveral sovereigns appeared then, as afterwards, under Constantine and\nhis successors, an unavoidable and necessary evil; or, in other words,\nthe several parts and members of the vast body of the Roman Empire,\nwhich approached nearer and nearer to its dissolution, began to fall\nto pieces, and that division itself accelerated again the destruction\nof the state, as it became the occasion of internal discord, and\nuniversal convulsion in the Roman world. The revolution accomplished\nby Constantine, indeed, might have become a real, and by far the most\ncomprehensive, regeneration of the Roman state, as it substituted for\nits originally defective, and now completely rotten, foundation of\nPaganism, a new principle of life, a higher and more potent energy of\ndivine truth and eternal justice. But Christianity had not yet near\nbecome the universal religion of the people, and Empire of\nRome--otherwise the great re-action, which took place under Julian,\nhad not been possible. The peasantry, in particular, continued for a\nlong time yet attached to the old idolatry; and hence the name of\nPagans was derived.[3] Even Constantine, though he publicly declared\nhimself a convert to Christianity, still did not dare to receive\nbaptism immediately, and thus enter fully into the great community of\nChristians. The administration of the Roman state was so completely\ninterwoven with Pagan rites and Pagan doctrines, that, from an act of\nthis public nature, dangerous collisions might have at first easily\nensued. On the whole, the old Roman maxims and principles of\nstate-policy continued to prevail, even for a long time after the\nreign of Constantine; and the period had not yet arrived when\nChristianity was to work a fundamental reform throughout the whole\npolitical world,--and a Christian government, if I may so speak, was\nto be established and organized on that eternal basis, and to strike\ndeep root and grow into the faith and life of the people, and into\ntheir habits and their feelings; but this great revolution was\nreserved for another and a later period.\n\n     [1] In confirmation of this pithy sentence of\n     Schlegel's, I may cite a remarkable passage from the\n     celebrated Lessing, which, as coming from an Infidel,\n     may perhaps have more weight with the Unitarian. \"If\n     Christ,\" he says, \"is not truly God, then Mohammedanism\n     was an undoubted improvement on the Christian religion:\n     Mahomet, on such a supposition, would indisputably have\n     been a greater man than Christ, as he would have been\n     far more veracious, more circumspect, and more zealous\n     for the honour of God, since Christ, by his\n     expressions, would have given dangerous occasion for\n     idolatry; while, on the other hand, not a single\n     expression of the kind can be laid to the charge of\n     Mahomet.\"--_Lessing's Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte und\n     Litteratur._ Vol. II. p. 410.--_Trans._\n\n     [2] By this expression, Schlegel does not mean to\n     question the supernatural agency that produced those\n     obstacles.--_Trans_\n\n     [3] From the Latin word _Pagus_, a rural district.\n\n\n\n\n                         END OF LECTURE X.\n\n\n\n\n                            LECTURE XI.\n\n\n  Of the ancient Germans, and of the invasion of the Northern\n    tribes.--The march of Nature in the historical development of\n    Nations.--Further diffusion and internal consolidation of\n    Christianity.--Great corruption of the world.--Rise of\n    Mahometanism.\n\n\nThe idolatry of the ancient Germans, like the less poetical, less\nartificial, and less elaborate Paganism of all primitive nations,\nconsisted in a simple adoration of Nature, such as existed among the\nPersians, with whom they had a very close affinity in race and in\nlanguage. Thus the objects of their worship were the stars, the sun\nand the moon, the celestial spirits, the various powers and elements\nof Nature, and in particular the mother earth, under the name of the\ngoddess Hertha. In the German and English names for the days of the\nweek, the names of the gods, Thun, Wodan, Thor, and Freya, are still\npreserved; and these in the Germanic mythology correspond to the\nplanets, most clearly visible from our globe--Mars, Mercury, Jupiter,\nand Venus; as it is also from these the Romanic languages have taken\nthe names of the weekdays. It does not appear, indeed, that there\nexisted in Germany quite so powerful, influential, and well-organized\na body of priests, as the Druids composed in Gaul; and we can only\ndiscover the existence of certain secret rites and mysteries of a very\nprimitive simplicity; as, for instance, the human sacrifice which was\noffered to the lake Hertha, in the Isle of Rugen, when a young man and\nmaiden were thrown into its solitary waters. It was in the obscurity\nof woods, under the sacred oak, or by the Linden, the tree of Northern\nenchantment, and on the mountaintops, they celebrated their rites,\nfestivals, and entertainments, or arranged the Runic sticks to search\ninto futurity; and as, among the Greeks, the Delphic oracle in moments\nof general danger was consulted, and gave its advice on the most\nimportant concerns of the nation; so the prophetesses and sybils of\nthe North, like the Velleda mentioned by the Romans, exerted a very\ndecisive influence on the public councils. Old poetical traditions of\ngods, heroes, giants, and spirits (in many respects like those of\nPersia), formed the keystone of the sacred recollections and national\nexistence of the Germanic nations.\n\nTheir original descent from Asia remained ever strong and lively in\ntheir remembrance, and allusions to it were interwoven into the whole\nbody of their traditionary poetry; and as in the Persian traditions,\nthe Arii are celebrated as the most generous and heroic nation of the\nprimitive ages, so the Asae occupy the most distinguished place in the\nNorthern mythology. In the Scandinavian North, which remained Pagan\nfor many centuries after Germany had become Christian, there are still\nextant many monuments and songs of a similar purport and strain; and\nof these, indeed, abundant vestiges are to be found every-where. These\nold historical traditions and this hereditary poetry had often a very\npowerful influence on real life, and on the martial enterprises and\nachievements of the tribes; and as in the heroic ages of the Greeks,\naccording to the Homeric description, so in those times the bard,\nproclaiming the history of gods and heroes, and attending on the\nperson of the prince or general of the army, was by no means an\nunimportant personage.\n\nA monarchy of such wide extent, as the ancient kingdom of Persia, did\nnot exist in Germany. The constitution, if we can apply such a term to\nthe wild freedom of those early ages, was more like that of Greece in\nthe heroic times, when she was governed by her noble families, and her\nterritory was divided into a number of petty kingdoms, which only\nrarely united in a great league for a common enterprise. This\nprimitive Germanic constitution was a very simple and free aristocracy\nof Nature. The tribe that composed the nation was an union or\nconfederacy of freemen and nobles under an hereditary tribe-prince,\nor chosen leader; and it was only at a later period that among some of\nthe Germanic nations, this confederacy gave way to a regular regal\ngovernment. Every freeman, and every man having a right to bear arms,\nwas a member of the Hermannia, which was afterwards called the\narriere-ban; and it was this ancient Hermannia that gave rise to the\nRoman name for Germany. The land was cultivated by bondsmen and\nslaves, who had been either purchased, or taken prisoners in war, or\nwere the conquered remnant of the ancient inhabitants of the country,\nor even men who for some crime had forfeited their freedom and\nnobility. When the Romans became better acquainted with the Germanic\nnations, the latter had partly become an agricultural people; and they\nobserved that very primitive custom of letting their fields lie\nalternately in fallow--a custom which has been so long retained in the\nNorth of Germany, under the name of _dreyfelder-wirthschaft_.\nPrivate property in land itself was not yet marked out nor enclosed\nwithin any exact limits--there was still much common land, and this\nwas naturally an inducement for the different tribes, whenever they\nhad a favourable opportunity, to change their abode and migrate. But\nthis infant agriculture was still held subordinate to the occupations\nof the chace and of the pastoral life, which furnished the principal\nmeans of subsistence. The different forests that still exist in\nGermany are merely the remaining fragments of the one, vast,\nboundless Hercynian forest, that once extended through the whole\ninterior of the country. From the quantity of wood that yet remained,\nthe soil of Germany was much more marshy, and its atmosphere\nincomparably colder, than at the present day. The buffalo and the elk,\nwhich at present are so very rarely to be met with in Germany, were\nthen animals indigenous to our country.\n\nThat this condition of the soil, and this unsettled mode of life, in a\ngrowing population are circumstances quite sufficient to account for a\npartial, though (without other co-operating causes) not perhaps for\nthe general, emigration of a whole tribe, must be evident to every\nperson. Internal factions and wars are quite adequate causes for the\nemigration of a whole tribe, or, at least, of a considerable portion.\nIn the early ages it was customary, when the population became too\nnumerous, for the younger brothers, or a certain number of youths\nchosen by lot, to quit their country under the guidance of a leader of\ntheir choice, or of one marked out by Fame, and, proceeding on an\nexpedition of adventure, conquer other homes for themselves, and seek\nout their fortunes towards the east, or towards the west, or beneath\nthe fairer sky of a southern region. Even in a more advanced, nay in\nthe most advanced, stage of civilization, every state and nation is\nnecessitated by nature, if I may so speak, to disburthen itself of a\nredundant population, and to extend itself in new settlements--in one\nword, to found colonies, and to possess colonies. This is the standing\nlaw,--the fundamental rule of health in the progressive development of\nnations; and where this necessity does not exist in an equal degree,\nwe must consider it only a case of exception, and we shall be sure to\nfind that some special cause precludes the operation of this principle\nfor a time: for, sooner or later, nature will force us to this\nexpedient. The commercial colonies of the Phoenicians and Greeks\nwere in part founded, and certainly at least defended, extended and\nconsolidated by force of arms; and it is only by similar means, that\nin modern times, Mexico and Peru have become colonies of Spain.\n\nBut in those early ages, and among those northern, warlike children of\nnature, this natural necessity of emigration could take no other\ncourse, nor have any other object but a military settlement. Such was\nthe result of the first irruption of the northern nations, mentioned\nin history--the expedition of the Gauls into Thrace, which was soon\nsucceeded by a second of a similar kind under Brennus; when that\nGallic general marched at the head of his troops into Macedon and\nGreece, and became master of the rich temple of Apollo at Delphi, and\nof all its accumulated treasures. A remnant of these troops finally\nfixed their abode in Asia Minor, and established a Gallic settlement\nin a province which from them received the name of _Galatia_. In\nthis first great expedition, or irruption of the northern nations, the\nnames of almost all the tribes and their leaders are Celtic; still\nsome few German names are found amongst them; and this may be easily\naccounted for, when we recollect that the Gauls, who were then widely\nspread, and inhabited even the North of Italy, were undoubtedly in\npossession of most of the Alpine countries, and thus may easily have\nengaged in their service some German tribes. Who knows but what some\nmarvellous tradition, and fabulous account of the lovely climate and\ndelicious fruits of the Southern regions, together with recollections\nof their original descent from the Southern nations of Asia, may have\ncontributed to bring the Cimbri and Teutones from the islands of\nScandinavia to the plains of Italy? Had the Romans not dreaded the\ndangerous precedent, and had they but allotted lands to these nations,\nthey might easily have kept terms of peace with them, and enlisted\ntheir most valiant youth in the service of their legions; as, indeed,\nunder the later emperors, the flower of their troops was selected from\nthe Gothic tribes.\n\nBut the case was widely different when the relations of peace and war,\nthe proximity of frontiers, and the occupation of the German\nterritory, brought the Romans in closer contact with the Germanic\nnations; as, for instance, in the campaigns which C\u00e6sar conducted\nagainst the chief of the Suevi, Ariovistus; Tiberius against\nMaroboduus, king of the Marcomanni; and the general of Augustus\nagainst the Saxon prince, Hermann. Here both parties diligently\nstudied and observed each other's excellencies and defects, and mixed\nin the most various intercourse. Thus Hermann's father lived among the\nRomans; his brother bore a Roman name; and his nephew was educated at\nRome. Maroboduus himself repaired thither, desirous like a prudent\nfoe, to examine with his own eyes the capital of Roman greatness and\npower. Among the German tribes and their leaders, factions were\nsometimes formed even against Hermann and Maroboduus; and at a later\nperiod, these divisions had no inconsiderable influence on the\nrelations of the Germanic nations with the Romans, and on their\nforeign enterprizes. The Roman frontier on the banks of the Rhine and\nthe Danube, fortified by a long line of castles, fortresses, and\ncities, lay for the most part within the German territory, and was\ninhabited by some German tribes, or German settlers that had been\nattracted thither. Here the nations of Germany saw their brethren of a\nkindred race, living indeed under the controul of Roman laws, which\nthose, who still retained their freedom, sought to repel by force of\narms; but on the other hand, they observed the high cultivation of a\ncountry, blest with all the advantages of civilization, and adorned\nwith so many of the arts of life, with the culture of the vine, and a\nvariety of the most exquisite fruits. And when, in the course of the\nalmost incessant wars waged on the frontier, they either encountered a\nfeeble resistance, or observed some defect in the mode of Roman\ndefence, the desire to prosecute their fortune, and penetrate into\nthose beautiful countries, must have considerably augmented. As, three\ncenturies ago, the fabulous accounts of treasures of gold, and rich\nores of silver, to be found in America, drew hosts of Spanish and\nother European adventurers over the Atlantic to the shores of the\nnewly-discovered continent; so the charms of a southern sky, the rich\nfruits, the vineyards, the blooming gardens of a warm, lovely and\nhighly cultivated region, wrought powerfully on the imaginations of\nthe Northerns, and were often the motive of their expeditions and\narmed migrations.\n\nThe first irruptions of the Alemanni in the reign of Marcus Aurelius,\nand subsequent to it, appear to have arisen immediately and naturally,\n(as I have said,) out of the perpetual wars waged on the frontier, on\nthe first advantage which those barbarians obtained over the Romans,\nand on the first defect or weakness which they espied in the defensive\noperations of their enemies. That the warfare on the frontier was\nperpetuated almost without intermission, it is the more natural to\nsuppose, since the Germanic nations by two armed confederacies of\ntheir tribes, had on their side opposed to the fortifications of the\nRoman boundaries a living frontier-wall. The name of the Marcomanni\nserved to designate not a particular tribe, but an armed confederation\nfor the defence of the whole nation; and the same remark holds good of\nthe Alemanni. In the descriptions which the Romans have given of\nGermany, they were occasionally led, by their ignorance of the\nlanguage, to mistake a league for a people, and to apply to a tribe\nthe denomination intended to denote a district or a custom. But in\nthese accounts it is very easy to trace the three or four leading\nnations of Germany, that figure afterwards in its history, and which,\non the dissolution of the Roman empire, possessed themselves of its\nprovinces, spread through the different Romanic countries, and in the\ncourse of time became the founders of the modern European states.\n\nThese three principal nations of Germany (and such they were\nconsidered by the Romans,) were the Suevi, the Saxons, and the Goths,\nwho may be best distinguished by the course of the rivers, which\nflowed through the countries they inhabited. The whole of that\nextensive country, afterwards called Ancient Saxony, and which lay\nalong the course and embouchures of the Elbe, the Eyder, the Ems and\nthe Weser, including the whole sea-coast with Jutland and Denmark, all\nthe Rhenish Netherlands with the Batavian shores, was inhabited by the\nSaxons; a people (for it was only later their name was explained from\na peculiar national weapon, or species of sword,) attached to the\nsoil, and who were of all the Germanic tribes the least prone to\nemigration; for, as mariners, they kept to the sea-coasts, and the\nbanks of rivers. It was only at the period when the tide of emigration\nhad reached its highest point that the Saxons, issuing from their\nnative seat, not only possessed themselves of, but as it were, peopled\nanew, the great British Isle; and it is very possible that this not\nwidely dispersed, but closely connected low-German race, then\nout-numbered all the other nations of Germany. It was on the banks of\nthe Upper Rhine and the Upper Danube that lay the original seat of the\nSuevi, a race perhaps more mixed, who occur in history under the name\nof the Alemanni, and were distinguished for a restless spirit of\nadventure and migratory enterprize. The name of the Franks, a people\noccupying so important a place in later history, denoted originally\nrather a league than a particular nation; and as their geographical\nseat lay between those of the Suevi and the Saxons, they were akin\nin character and by descent to both those nations. In their manners\nand mode of government they resembled the Alemanni; while in race and\nlanguage they were originally more nearly allied to the Saxons. If the\nFranks are to be considered a distinct nation, it is the ancient Catti\nor Hessians (who have ever been included among that people) that we\nmust regard as the main stock of the whole race.\n\nBut the second great primitive and leading race among the Germanic\nnations were the Goths, a people whose territory spread from the\nScandinavian Peninsula, and the shores of the Baltic, along the whole\ncourse of the Vistula, as far as the Black Sea. Their language, as it\nexists in the yet extant Gothic bible of Ulphilas, is what we would\nnow call the high Dutch dialect; though its form is more ancient, and\nis distinguished for a certain purity of structure, not without its\npeculiar charm. This Gothic dialect is, in tone and form, less akin to\nthe Saxon and Scandinavian languages, except in so far as the branches\nof a stem, the nearer we approach the roots, reveal more clearly their\ncommon origin. In the Scandinavian North, the territories of these two\nprincipal Germanic races, the Goths and the Saxons, were contiguous;\nand, proceeding from this common source, the two nations branched out\ninto separate and various streams. Of a similar, or at least of a\nkindred, race to the Goths, were the Burgundians and Vandals, who\nafterwards founded the kingdoms of that name in Gaul and Spain.\nHereditary monarchy attained to a more settled form among the Goths\nthan among any other of the Germanic nations; and, divided between two\ndifferent dynasties, the Ostro-Goths were subject to the heroic family\nof the Amali, and the Visi-Goths to that of the Balti. The Roman\nhistorians of that age often speak of their martial courage and\nmagnanimity, as well as of their lofty and commanding stature.\n\nThe real emigration of the Northern tribes originated solely and\nimmediately with the Goths; and, in the first period, was not produced\nby any commotion among the Asiatic nations, as was afterwards the\ncase. As early as the third century, the Goths took possession of the\ncountries situated on the Northern coast of the Euxine, and penetrated\ninto Greece as far as Athens. The Emperor Decius fell in the war\nagainst them, and in the peace which they concluded with Aurelian,\nthey retained the further Dacia which had been previously surrendered.\nThey now became allies of the Romans, who were happy enough to\ncultivate the relations of peace with them, and to recruit their\nlegions with the Gothic youth. A hundred years later, the Goths on the\ndeath of their king Hermanric, were disturbed in their settlements\nnear the Black Sea by the Huns: a people who, according to the Chinese\nannals, originally inhabited the Northern frontier of China towards\nthe Eastern parts of the Middle Asia, and who afterwards, bearing down\nwestward, took up their abode for a long time on the Eastern shores of\nthe Caspian, till at last they forced their way into the Caucasian\nregions, and the territory of the Goths on the borders of the Black\nSea.\n\nIt was only now, when the minds of the German tribes of the West were\nat the same time rising to a higher and higher pitch of excitement,\nand the old Empire of Rome was on every side crumbling into ruins,\nthat the tide of Northern emigration burst out in all its full and\nfearful violence. In the first irruptions, the names of the different\ntribes, as well as of their leaders, were almost all without exception\nGerman; but now we meet with many foreign names, which discover not\nonly the Asiatic Huns, but the Sclavonian, and even perhaps,\noccasionally, the Finnish tribes, that were undoubtedly then\nintermingled with the Goths in the vast empire of the latter. For\nfifty years after the first invasion, the Huns remained at peace in\ntheir new settlements between the Theiss and the Danube, nor did they\ndisturb the Roman Empire till the time of Attila. The Goths offered to\ndefend the frontier against these barbarians, and received in return\nthe province to the south of the Danube.\n\nThe Goths readily embraced Christianity; but they received it in the\nArian form; for at the time when religious instructors and the Gothic\nbishop Ulphilas were sent from Constantinople, the Arian party had the\nascendancy in that capital. This circumstance had afterwards the most\nfatal influence on the destinies of the Roman Empire; for one of the\nchief causes of its downfal was this new contest in religious matters.\nIt was on this very account the second conquest of Rome by the Vandal\nKing Genseric was attended with far more devastation than the first\nunder the Visi-Goth King Alaric; for the former persecuted the\nCatholic church with all the animosity of an Arian. The Goths were not\nanimated by feelings of hostility towards the Romans; but were rather\ndisposed to admire the excellence and superiority of their\ncivilization. When the Emperor Valens perished in the Gothic war,\nwhich Roman treachery had occasioned, Theodosius contrived to conclude\nan advantageous peace with this people, when they stood at the very\ngates of Constantinople, took forty thousand of their troops into his\npay, and renewed the armed confederacy of the Goths which Constantine\nhad formed. When the Gothic prince Athanaric had contemplated with\nastonishment the pomp and splendour of Constantinople, and had\nconceived sentiments of respect for the personal character of\nTheodosius; the Goths, moved by the representations of their prince,\ndeclared to Theodosius that as long as he lived, they wished to have\nno other king but himself. But the case was altered under the sons of\nTheodosius; and, to defend themselves from this people, these princes\nknew no other expedient than to let loose on Italy these barbarians,\nand to divert and point the storm of invasion towards that quarter.\nThis policy produced the expedition of the Visi-Goth King Alaric to\nRome, and the first conquest of the eternal and seven-hilled city.\n\nThe disputes between Rome and the new Byzantine court did not a little\ncontribute to the downfal of the Roman Empire; and the dexterity, or\nrather craftiness, which the politicians of Constantinople displayed\non this, as on many other occasions, was often attended with\nconsequences the most ruinous to Italy. As the universal empire of\nRome had grown out of civil war, so it was undermined and ruined more\nby internal discord and corruption, than by the power of the Goths; a\nnation with whom the Romans might easily have contracted relations of\namity, and induced to fraternize, and become by degrees one people\nwith themselves; and indeed, at various periods, the policy of the\nbetter Emperors had prepared the way for such an union. As, of all the\nGermanic nations, the Goths were the most powerful; and as their\nassistance would have enabled the Romans to resist all the other\ntribes; such an alliance, as I here speak of, would have accomplished\nby pacific means the purpose of the great Northern migration, namely,\nthe union of the sound, vigorous, native spirit of the Germans with\nthe civilization of the Romans (then indeed sunk to the lowest state\nof debasement), and whose polity and public life Christianity itself\nwas unable totally to regenerate. And thus a long intermediate period\nof conflict and confusion would have been rendered unnecessary.\n\nDuring the troubles which followed the first conquest of Rome by\nAlaric, the Romans invoked from Africa the aid of Genseric, King of\nthe Vandals,--a prince who both as a warrior, and as a ruler, was far\nmore cruel than Alaric, and who every where spread terror on his\nmarch. Jealous and suspicious of the Goths, he invited into Italy\nAttila, with all the nations which his martial prowess had subjected\nor attached to his authority, and occasioned the expedition of the\nlatter into the West, where, in the great battle on the banks of the\nMarna, the Goths constituted the main portion of both the contending\narmies. The Huns and some other of the invading nations were still\nPagans; and the history of that age amply demonstrated that wars are\never more destructive in proportion as the armies are more numerous,\nthe throng of armed multitudes more dense, and the nations composing\nthem more various and dissimilar. Still the general oppression,\nanarchy, desolation, and misery, in those times, are not to be traced\nsolely to wars and battles; for, during the most flourishing and\ncivilized ages of ancient Rome, wars were almost perpetually waged,\nand were generally more, and certainly not less, bloody and\ndestructive than the present. The Bishop of Rome contrived to avert\nthe torrent of hostilities from his capital, and the city was spared.\nOn the death of Attila, the Huns ceased to be formidable; for the\npower of that prince, which depended far less on their numbers, than\non his own military prowess and glory, perished at once with him.\n\nOdoacer, Prince of the Heruli and Rugians, (nations also Gothic) was\ncalled to the Empire of Rome from the banks of the Danube. From his\nconquest dates the downfal of the Western Empire, and the last Roman\nyouth who was yet dignified with the name of emperor, was called\nRomulus, 1228 years after the first Romulus,--the founder of the\neternal city--a city which after it had lost its outward and political\npower, became the centre of a vast sacerdotal dominion, and again\noccupied in succeeding times a mighty and important place in history.\nWhen the sway of the Heruli became an object of detestation in Rome\nand Italy, the Greek Emperor Zeno, in a formal document, conferred on\nthe Ostro-Goth King Theodoric, who had been educated at\nConstantinople, the dominion of Italy; and the latter, after his\nvictory over Odoacer, assumed the Roman purple, in lieu of the Gothic\ndress. He was highly esteemed in Rome, and by all the Germanic\nnations; his name, like that of Charlemagne after him, was celebrated\nin the heroic songs of the Germans, while political writers and\nhistorical critics commend alike his talents and his virtues. His rule\nwas generous and noble; he loved and honoured the arts and sciences\nwhich his age still possessed, and the last of Roman writers,\nCassiodorius and Boethius, were the ornaments of his reign. Factions\nwhich arose on the death of this great prince, and a crime perpetrated\non the relics of his house,[4] afforded the active Emperor of the\nEast, Justinian, an opportunity to re-establish the Greek sway in\nItaly, by means of his successful General, Belisarius. Military\ncommanders like Belisarius, and some worthier and more enterprizing\nprinces on the throne of Byzantium, as well as that systematic course\nof policy I have before described, maintained the Byzantine Empire;\nwhile Rome itself was ruined, and Italy fell under the dominion of the\nLombards, who succeeded the Goths, and were succeeded in their turn by\nthe Franks--under whom the Roman Empire of Germany was re-established,\nand Rome became, and continued, united with that empire during the\nmiddle ages, though for the most part only in name.\n\nThis rapid but faithful sketch of the migration of the Northern\nnations seemed necessary to enable us to form a right opinion on this\nsubject. For this period, which laid the mighty foundation on which\nthe whole Teutonico--Romanic structure of the institutions, laws,\nmanners, languages, opinions, and even the peculiar imaginative\ncharacter of modern European nations, has been raised, has not always\nbeen fully understood, or justly appreciated by many writers, either\nled away by a partial enthusiasm for the antique, or enthralled by\nmodern opinions and prejudices--writers who wish to trace in all parts\nof creation, and even in universal history, the same dead uniformity\nand monotony of plan. It is by no means common to meet with an\nHistorical inquirer, possessing a flexibility of fancy, a justness of\nfeeling, and a soundness and correctness of judgment, capable of\ntransporting him into the remote ages of history, and the mythic\nantiquity of nations. But in the present instance, and throughout the\nwhole of this chaotic epoch, when the old fictions of the Titanic wars\nappear to be actually realized, and when the marvellous of events and\nsentiments is to be found in the obscure and meagre chronicles of that\nage, which often unite fragments of popular mythology and Pagan\ntradition, with real historic incidents; it is perhaps still more\ndifficult to form an accurate judgment, and to discriminate between\nthe elements of truth and falsehood. As we cannot figure to ourselves\nsuch a state of anarchy, we are unable to comprehend it. We should\nbear in mind how often in nature the fairest bloom of vegetation, and\nthe richest fullness of organic life, spring out of a state of\nconfusion and chaos, when the elemental powers, after a long strife\nand conflict, settle at last into a state of harmonious equipoise,\nunite and fructify, and in some creative moment, when the struggle of\nlabour is over, give birth to new and more beautiful forms of\nexistence. Ancient Egypt was indebted for its fertility to the\nperiodic inundations of the Nile, which, had they not been provided\nagainst by mounds and dams, would have occasioned the utmost\ndesolation. Nay, doth not this earth we inhabit, and which nourishes\nus, with all that fair and blooming vegetation spread over its\nsurface, with all that boundless wealth and variety of animal life,\nand with all the civility and refinement of man's existence, whose\nabode it constitutes; doth not this earth, I say, teeming as it doth\nwith fertility and life, rest on the gigantic remains of a primitive\nworld submerged by the old floods, and which was often torn, convulsed\nand rent asunder by the eruptions of subterraneous fire? Well, the\nmigration of the Northern nations brought about a sort of chaotic\nstruggle between the various elements of society--it was a new Ogygean\ninundation of nations in the historical ages--but it laid the fruitful\nsoil--the historical foundation of a new moral and intellectual form\nof life. This vast flux and reflux of nations, rolling in incessant\nwaves from the East to the West, and from the North to the South, and\nback again to the East and to the North, this emission of immense\narmies issuing in all directions from a common centre, and returning\nagain to that centre from every side--all this vast movement must be\nlooked upon as a strife and contention between the elemental powers of\nhuman society. The first effect, indeed, of such a strife of nature's\nelements let loose is to destroy, or at least, to impair all existing\norganic forms; and it must be confessed, this wild and protracted\nstate of confusion and anarchy does not present the most pleasing and\nauspicious aspect to the eye of the historical observer. With respect\nto the latter circumstance, we must recollect that the extremely slow\nprogress, and often unexpected delays, in the advancement of human\nsociety, correspond not always, and indeed rarely, to our wishes and\nexpectations; while, on the other hand, there are epochs in history,\nwhen we are amazed by the sudden out-burst of the most extraordinary\nevents, and when a great splendour of moral and intellectual life\nsurprises us of a sudden, like a bright morning in Spring. In other\nwords, there is a strong, wise and Fatherly hand which guides and\nconducts the destinies of individuals, as well as the march of\nsociety, and the course of ages; or as the Scripture, with touching\nsimplicity, saith, \"the Father hath reserved times unto himself;\" and\nTime in his march keepeth not pace with the rapidity of our desires,\nnor moveth according to our views and hopes. But whatever may be, if I\nmay so speak, the fearful tardiness, wherewith the views of Providence\nover the destinies of the human race are accomplished;--a tardiness,\nwhereof man has to bear the greatest blame; or whatever may be, if I\nmay so say, the long delays of divine justice--the procrastination of\nthe period of grace;--it cannot be doubted that the general result of\nthe great Northern migration was most salutary, and that that mixture\nof the Germanic tribes with the degenerate population of Rome--that\nalliance between the healthy, vigorous, and native intellectual energy\nof Germany, and the rapidly decaying civilization of Rome, were\nproductive of the mightiest and most beneficial consequences. Whoever\ndoubts the truth of this observation, may cure his scepticism by\ncomparing the splendour, activity and variety in the political and\nintellectual existence of the modern European states, that have sprung\nout of this union of the Germanic and Romanic nations, with the dull\nmonotony, the thorough moral and intellectual stupor which prevailed\nin the later Byzantine Empire.\n\nBut I have more than once observed that, independently of that\nprogressive power of reason, inherent in all the forms and departments\nof human activity; and independently of the operations of Divine\nProvidence, which form that high mysterious chain of unity which links\ntogether the different periods of man's social progress;\nindependently, I say, of all these, there is a law of nature--a high,\nand secret principle of nature, presiding over the life and growth of\nhuman society--which, if kept in due subordination to the higher\nprinciple of Providence, will not be found incompatible with it. The\nprevalence of this law of nature may be clearly traced in the history\nof mankind, and even in that of particular nations, when their social\nprogress is not impeded or interrupted by violent or irregular causes.\nAnd in following the current of events in History, the historical\nobserver can accurately distinguish the different periods of national\ndevelopement--the first period of artless, yet marvellous,\nchildhood--the next of the first bloom and flush of youth--later, the\nmaturer vigour and activity of manhood--and at last the symptoms of\napproaching age, a state of general decay, and second childishness.\nThis energy of nature, which, together with the other, higher and\ndivine principle of human destiny, is inherent in mankind, displays\nitself even in the sphere of intellect, and particularly in the\nflourishing eras of art and science. It is even still more, or at\nleast quite as, perceptible in those creative moments already\ndescribed, of a new, though perhaps, at first, a chaotic epoch of\nhuman society: so far, at least, as those plastic, eventful moments\nare not the mere offspring and counterfeit production of revolutionary\nviolence--but have issued from the very well-spring of nature. When\nthe latter is the case, it will be found that the whole tendency of\nthese periods of extraordinary ferment in society is conducive to the\nextension of the divine principle, and to the promotion of the views\nof Providence, as was eminently the case in the era of the great\nNorthern migrations; an era, when a catastrophe, at first the most\nappalling, led to the further triumph of Christianity, which conferred\non those robust, Northern children of nature the high consecration of\nan empire, which thereby, in its ulterior progress, far outshone the\nRoman, or any other old Pagan domination. But unquestionably the two\nconflicting elements in that eventful period, which contained the\nfirst germs of all modern civilization--the free-born energy of\nGermanic nature, and the Romanic refinement, science, and language,\nwere happily blended and harmonized by the Christian religion only,\nwhich on that account must be regarded as the all-connecting bond--the\none all-animating principle of social life in modern ages. But without\nthat new element of vital power furnished by the Northern emigrations,\nChristianity alone would not have regenerated the degraded people of\nRome, nor have restored its intellectual energy, then sunk to too low\na state of debasement. Above all, the primitive, innate, and deeply\nrooted corruption of the Roman government was beyond the power of\nremedy, and could only be removed by time.\n\nThe evils of the age were indeed, universal; for, even in the bosom of\nChristianity, discord had broken out; and where even faith was\npreserved in its purity, there, to use the expression of Holy Writ,\n\"much of first love was gone.\" But for this, the influence of\nChristianity on the Roman empire, and the Roman world, would have been\nfar more extensive; and a miraculous cure would have been wrought on\nthe moral distempers of society, as on the physical diseases of\nindividuals. And as holy hermits were often able to command the\nelements of nature and the savage beasts of the desert; so a divine\npower, by its mild, conciliating, prompt and effective influence would\nin the first moment have allayed the wild jar and strife of the\nsocial elements. But these effects were accomplished only by slow\ndegrees, by the soothing influence of time, and by the gradual\ninfusion of the spirit of Christianity into the human mind.\n\nThe progressive corruption and ever growing disorders of the Roman\nworld were productive of consequences in some degree important to\nChristianity, particularly in relation to after-ages. To forsake and\nrenounce that world of cruelty and vice, that kingdom of\ndissimulation, that age of confusion and barbarism, and to seek by\npreference an abode and asylum in the wilderness, in the neighbourhood\nof lions and other savage animals of the desert, required no\nextraordinary impulse of Christian feeling, and scarcely more than a\nhigh effort of human courage. And thus in that convulsed period of the\nRoman Empire, and under the accurst domination of its last tyrants,\nChristian anchorets peopled the solitudes of Thebais,--those solitudes\nwhere the old pyramids and other monuments of hoar antiquity still\nspeak in mute signs to the traveller, their grave and earnest\nlanguage. Self-contemplation did not shut up these Christian\nanchorites within a narrow and egotistical sphere of thought, as is\nthe case with the Indian recluse, who, to outward appearance, leads\nthe same mode of life. As the primitive Christians evinced the power\nof faith and charity by deeds and in sufferings, in words and in works\nof manifold kinds; so prayer was to these solitaries the inward porch\nof a new and invisible world--a real business of life, and a bond of\nthe closest and tenderest connection, whereby, though separated from\nthe world, they remained, even at the remotest distance, intimately\nunited with all who, like themselves, were firmly united to God.\n\nThus it was that the Primitive Christians displayed the power of\ndivine Hope, and ardent Charity, not only in their heroic constancy\nunder assaults, persecutions, sufferings and torments of all, even the\nmost exquisite, kinds; but in their renunciation of society and of all\nearthly enjoyments, in their contempt and abandonment of a world,\nwhich seemed in truth eternally distracted and irretrievably undone.\nIn the eremitical life, a simple handicraft was ordinarily coupled\nwith the duty of spiritual contemplation. These first Christian\nAnchorites of Egypt were the original and model of all later monastic\ninstitutes; although, conformably to the living and quite practical\nspirit of Christianity, these institutes have generally admitted into\ntheir rules other useful and salutary exercises adapted either to the\ngeneral circumstances of the age, or to the wants of individuals--such\nas the education of youth--the cultivation of the sciences--the relief\nof the poor--the care of the infirm--and the practice of other works\nof charity. The Anchorites, who lead a purely contemplative life,\nconstitute a comparatively small and rare exception in the Christian\nchurch; and they are tolerated only because the ways of human nature\nare so infinitely diversified, and often so strange and so singular.\n\nTo resist their internal foes, to withstand the assaults of the\nfiend--the spirit of discord and corruption, and to preserve inviolate\nthe purity of morals, as well as of faith, the Primitive Christians as\nmuch needed the divine assistance, as to enable them to endure\noutwardly the torments of martyrdom, or to renounce in holy solitude\nthe pleasures of the world. In this respect three different kinds of\nheresy, which were so many trials the Christian religion had to\nsustain, are well worthy of our attention. From the very birth of\nChristianity, the Gnostics gave loose to the ardour of an Oriental\nfancy, indulged in a variety of Theosophistic speculations, and with\ntheir systems of Divine Emanations, Eradiations, Incarnations, and\nPersons, formed an almost mythological concatenation of ideas; so that\nhad it been possible for this sect to become predominant, and for\nChristianity to swerve into such a labyrinth of doctrines, our divine\nreligion would have degenerated into a system of metaphysical\nfictions, not unlike the philosophic mythology and poetical creed of\nIndia. Happily these sects of Gnostics were not numerous, nor in\ngeneral of long duration; and they were extremely divided among\nthemselves; for a truly inventive fancy ever strikes out a path of\nenquiry for itself. But, when considered in an intellectual point of\nview, these sectaries, amid all their strange and whimsical errors,\nmust ever command the attention of mankind. It would seem from all\nappearance, (and indeed the nature of things would sufficiently\nwarrant the inference) that many of these sects combined with their\nown peculiar notions, the opinions of other oriental sects, totally\nalien from Christianity. As the march of error is infinitely\nprogressive, and as, from its very nature, false opinion is sure to\nbranch out into a variety of ramifications, it is often difficult to\ndetermine with exactness whether some of these Gnostic sects, that\nspread through Central Asia, and were lost in a multitude of others,\nwere or not of a Christian origin. Of all the sects belonging to the\nGnostic family, the Manich\u00e6ans alone appear to have had a longer\nexistence; and during the middle ages, they secretly germinated in\nEurope.\n\nThe second corruption of Christianity was from Arianism, which\ncorresponds to what in modern times is termed Rationalism; though the\nformer appeared in another and more Christian form. That the dispute\nwith Arianism was no mere verbal dispute--that it involved a capital\narticle of faith--a question of life or death for Christianity--a\nquestion whether the real Foundation--the essential Corner-stone--and\nBeginning of our faith were really, truly, and in very deed divine,\nand from God, and equal with God, or merely in a certain sense like to\nGod--(an opinion which the Platonic, or any other system of\nphilosophy might have included among its tenets)--that the dispute\nwith Arianism was no mere verbal dispute, must be evident to every\nupright, ingenuous, and unprejudiced mind. No sect has ever been so\nwidely diffused, nor has ever taken such deep root; and, by the arts\nand evasions of a prodigious subitlty it maintained its principles\nunder the mask of apparent submission. It was now that for the first\ntime, the importance and power of a general council became apparent,\nin order to oppose to the many-shaped, subtle, and intangible spirit\nof error, a brief, but clear, and definite formulary of that faith\nwhich animated the bosom, and was rooted in the conviction, of every\nChristian. This destructive rationalism of the early ages of\nChristianity was at last repressed, and became finally extinct; though\nthe last ramifications of this sect have continued down to our times\namong the Eutychians of Armenia, and the Nestorians of Ethiopia.\n\nHow much the unhappy disputes of Arianism contributed in this period\nof general decline, towards the downfal of the Roman Empire, I have\nalready had occasion to notice. But that passion for dispute, which,\nif not innate in man, has at least become his second nature, and is,\nas it were, the original sin of human intellect, displays itself in a\nmore striking degree in certain sects, that did not question any\narticle of faith, but merely some subordinate matters of opinion, or\nthe rights of ecclesiastical authority, and who conducted their\ndisputes with the most unyielding obstinacy--such a passion, I say,\ndisplays itself more strikingly in these sects than in others, that\ncalled in question points of faith, and who, so far as they were\nconscientious in their errors, appear entitled to our respect and\nforbearance. Among the former class of disputants, must be ranked some\nof the smaller, less diffused, and obscurer sects of the first ages of\nthe church, like the Montanists and Donatists;--sects, whose influence\nwas on that account by no means unimportant, and who occupy no\ninsignificant place in the history of their times; for their errors\nconstitute the third form of deviation from universal Christianity. In\nthe same category must we place the great schism of a later period,\nwhich severed the Greek from the Western church; for this unhappy\nseparation, as is well known, had no relation to any important dogma\nof Christianity.\n\nAs the general councils of that period prove the self-preserving and\nself-sustaining power of Christianity, so the energy of Christian\nfaith and Christian intellect displays its life, activity and\nscientific progress in the numberless and manifold productions of\nthose first doctors of the church, so highly revered by all succeeding\nages. The style and language of these works must be estimated by the\nstandard of their age; and it would be absurd to expect them to\npossess, in a like degree, the attic simplicity of a Xenophon, or the\nfull and elaborate periods of a Livy. But with this single exception,\nthese writings display the most varied talents for oratory and\nphilosophy, united with extensive learning, the purest feelings of\nreligious love, and the most correct views in religion. And, to cite\nbut one or two examples out of the multitude of ecclesiastical\nwriters, St. Augustine, by the extent of his historical information,\nby a philosophy zealous in its enquiries after truth, but still\nirresolute, presents the image of a Christian Cicero, in a language\nsomewhat altered indeed, but distinguished for a similar employment of\nrhetoric. Nor was this great man destitute of political discernment\nand penetration; and he certainly possessed a much more decided talent\nfor speculative enquiry, than the old Roman who flourished in the last\nage of the Republic. There was next that learned and holy recluse, St.\nJerome, who was as well versed in classical literature as in the\noriental languages, and who was gifted with a depth of critical\ndiscernment, and an original power of thought and expression, equalled\nby very few orators and thinkers in any age.\n\nThe dread of a false Gnosis was at that period, as often in subsequent\nages, an obstacle to the progress of a profound Christian philosophy.\nThe leaning of the great ecclesiastical writer, Origen, particularly\nin his youth, to some opinions of the Gnostics, excited long after his\ndeath many doubts and controversies respecting some points of his\nbelief, and tended at least to impair the reverence with which his\nphilosophical genius was otherwise regarded. This was particularly the\ncase when the Arians made use of some doubtful opinions of this great\nman for the support of their system; as indeed it often happens that\nan elevated system of philosophy if not completed in its parts, or at\nleast that the individual errors it may contain are seized upon by the\ndull, innovating spirit of a superficial, and half-doubting faith, and\ndebased to a quite alien and inferior sphere of speculation.\n\nThere is also another error, or rather illusion, which deserves to be\nnoticed, as it is a characteristic incident in the history of those\nearly ages of the church; for it was no regular system of error, nor\ndid its partisans constitute a sect; but it was merely the exaggerated\nopinion of some individuals in the bosom of the church, who were\nanimated by no intentions hostile to Christianity. I allude to the (so\ncalled) Millenarian doctrine, which, as it refers to the future\nhistorical destiny of Christianity, possesses a high historical\ninterest. Though the Prophet of the New Testament marked out the\nperiod of a thousand years for the duration of the triumph of the\nchurch, he expressly intimated thereby that that period could not be\ndiscovered nor determined by human penetration, for, as the scripture\nsaith, \"a thousand years are as one day with the Lord, and one day as\na thousand years;\" and though the inspired writer expressly added,\nthat as the great combat, which man is doomed to on the earth and in\nearthly life, can never be completely terminated, a last combat\nawaited humanity at the close of those thousand years; many virtuous\nand praiseworthy men were still found, who depicted this kingdom of a\nthousand years in the most sensual colours of earthly felicity, and\nthus destroyed all faith in that prophetic warning, so necessary for\nman and for all ages--all belief in the ideal conception of the\nkingdom of divine truth: or, with reckless precipitancy equally\nmisapplied the words of the prophet, and (as has often been the case\nin succeeding times) very unseasonably alarmed themselves and others;\nthough that long series of ages marked out by the Apostle for the\nprogress of Christianity might have opened their eyes, and taught them\ndifferently. But the principal cause which opposed, and must ever\noppose an insurmountable difficulty to the Millenarian system of that\nand of all succeeding ages, is the limit assigned to the judgment of\nChristians in all that relates to the inscrutable decrees of Divine\nProvidence; whether those decrees regard individuals or mankind in\ngeneral. Surely nothing could be conceived more disquieting, more\nfatal to human life, than for every individual to know beforehand with\nthe utmost certainty from his birth the day and hour of his death; and\nno greater calamity could happen to any man than a revelation of such\na kind. The same remark is equally applicable to the world in general,\nwhere such fore-knowledge would only produce the utmost disorder and\nconfusion. As in the case of a sick man reduced to imminent danger\nfrom the increasing symptoms of dissolution; though no man, not even\nthe physician, can positively know and determine with certainty the\ncourse of events, which is known to God alone, still every friend\nwould wish that the patient should examine his interior, unite his\nthoughts to God, and set his house in order; so cases may be imagined,\nwhen this comparison would apply to mankind at large.\n\nThus then on the Roman soil, and amid that world once so brilliant,\nChristianity had grown up, like a tender, luminous plant, whose seed\nhad come down from Heaven. For the further expansion of that heavenly\nseed, for the formation of the Christian state, and the political\norganization of Christian nations, we must allow that the all-wise and\npowerful Hand, which guides the destinies of men and of nations, the\nmarch of ages, and the course of events, found it necessary to employ\nat first very violent, and (if we may borrow a term of the medical\nart) almost heroic remedies. The cause of this undoubtedly must be\nsought for in the fact, that although many great and holy men are to\nbe found in the first ages of the church, mankind on the whole had\nvery imperfectly corresponded to that mighty and divine impulse which\nChristianity had imparted to the world; and had very soon and very\nquickly fallen into the most fearful disputes. Scarce had that\ninundation of the Northern nations burst in upon the blooming garden\nof the Christian West, (and beneficial to mankind as have been the\nremote consequences and final results of that revolution, and\ndefensible therefore as it may be in a historical Theodicea, still we\ncannot deny that its immediate effects were most terrible and\ndestructive;)--scarce, we say, had this inundation of the Northern\nnations occurred, when, in the opposite quarter of the East, there\nbroke out among the nations of Asia, that mighty Arabian\nconflagration, whose flames were scattered over the terrified globe,\nby the sons of the desert, guided by their new prophet of unbelief,\nand animated themselves with all the enthusiasm of destruction.\n\nI am at a loss to conceive how some could have regarded it as a\npeculiar merit of this religion of empty arrogance and senseless\npride, that it maintains and inculcates with purity a belief in one\nAlmighty Deity. This, as the Scripture says, the demons themselves, in\ntheir realms of eternal darkness, believe, without being on that\naccount at all the better; and it is only a profound ignorance of the\nworld and himself that could ever make man forget and obliterate from\nhis bosom that first foundation of all faith. All the elements of\nsalvation, reconciliation, mercy, love, and happiness for mankind, to\nbe found in eternal truth, and a belief in that truth, all these are\nwanting in the religion of Mahomet. There is not a more decided\ncontrast than that presented by the silent progress of the new and\ndivine light of truth in the primitive church, amid oppression and\npersecution, in meek submission to every existing law, and, except in\nmatters of faith, in a patient, unwearied, and cheerful submission to\nthe hostile, but still legitimate, powers of the earth; and, on the\nother hand, that fanatic thirst of conquest inspired by Mahomet--that\nexpress precept to propagate by fire and sword throughout the four\nquarters of the globe the new _Unitarian_ faith of Arabia. If\nsome writers instead of studying the history of modern Europe, in\norder to deduce from their researches new matter and occasion for\nreviving the old contests about the respective rights and limits of\nthe secular and ecclesiastical powers, would only examine with\nattention the history of the ancient Caliphate, they would soon\nsatisfy themselves of the fearful character of that Institution, of\nthe infernal spirit that produced that anti-Christian combination of\nspiritual and temporal authority, and of the horrible state of moral\ndegradation to which it has reduced mankind in every country where it\nhas prevailed.\n\nIt was with the rapidity of a destructive fire that this mighty\nmischief spread over the countries of Asia, and a large portion of\nAfrica, till it soon menaced the Southern extremities of Europe. When\nMahomet died, he was master of Arabia, a country that from the\nearliest antiquity had remained in a state of absolute seclusion from\nthe rest of the world; and consequently if this great revolution had\nremained confined within the limits of this region, the religion of\nMahomet would never have exerted so mighty an historical influence on\nother nations and kingdoms. But only a few score years from his\ndecease, and under his immediate successors, the whole Western Asia\nbetween the Tigris and Euphrates, as far as the Mediterranean, Syria,\nand Palestine, down to Mount Taurus and the frontiers of Asia Minor,\nand soon again the whole Northern coast of Africa, down to the\nopposite shores of Spain, were subdued by the disciples of the Koran;\nwhile at the same moment the Roman West and the Empire of Persia were\nmenaced by the arms of these formidable invaders. It was a general\nprinciple with the Mahometan conquerors to extirpate all recollection\nof antiquity in the countries which they subdued, to give them an\nentirely new form and aspect--or, in other words, to destroy and\nobliterate every vestige of the higher and better civilization that\nhad adorned those once flourishing regions.\n\n     [4] Schlegel alludes to the murder of Amalasontha,\n     daughter of Theodoric, and to the usurpation of\n     Theodatus.--_Trans._\n\n\n\n\n                         END OF LECTURE XI.\n\n\n\n\n                           LECTURE XII.\n\n\n  Sketch of Mahomet and his religion.--Establishment of the\n    Saracenic Empire.--New organization of the European West, and\n    Restoration of the Christian Empire.\n\n\nFrom the earliest period, the pastoral tribes of Arabia have lived\nunder their Emirs, in all the wild independence of Nomade nations;\nthey were not however without cities, as these were created and\nrendered necessary by the trade of the caravan, which in its journies\nthrough the wilderness, and in its passage from one inhabited province\nto another, required these points of rest. A few of the\nfrontier-districts and maritime coasts were indeed possessed by some\nof the more ancient Egyptian Pharaohs; but the entire country was\nnever subdued or conquered either by the Assyrians, the Persians, or\nthe Macedonian conquerors. Nor were the Romans more successful; and it\nwas only in the reign of Trajan, the last of Roman emperors, who\nmeditated schemes of conquest, that a small frontier tract of Arabia\nPetr\u00e6a was taken possession of, and annexed to, the Roman Empire.\nImmediately on the death of Trajan, the Roman government recurred to\nthe pacific policy of Augustus, who had considered it dangerous to\nenlarge the empire by any new conquests: and in consequence, this\nprovince of Arabia was abandoned by the Romans, and left to the\nenjoyment of its ancient freedom.\n\nThis long-established liberty and total independence on all foreign\nconquerors and rulers has not a little contributed to exalt among the\nArabs a strong self-consciousness. Their origin, which is very nearly\nakin to that of the Hebrews, they deduce as descendants of Yoktan\nfrom _Heber_, who was an ancestor of Abraham, or from Ishmael, the son\nof Abraham, that was born in the desert. Among these free and warlike\npastoral nations, the feelings of clanship, the pride of noble\ndescent, and the glory of an ancient and renowned race, and again the\nmutual hostility of tribes transmitted from one generation to another,\nthe never-to-be-cancelled debt of blood, form the ruling and animating\nprinciple, nay, the almost exclusive purport of existence. This\n_tribe-spirit_ of the Arabians has had a mighty influence on the\norigin and first developement of the Mahometan religion, and has\nstamped on it a peculiar character. And among the Nomade nations in a\nsimilar stage of social advancement, and who combine the freedom of\nthe pastoral life with the commerce of caravans, and are not total\nstrangers to the refinement of cities, the faith of Mahomet has not\nonly obtained the easiest access, but has struck the deepest roots,\nand finds, as it were, its most natural disciples. For the Tartar\nnations in the interior parts of Asia, and the tribes of Berbers, who\nare the original inhabitants of the North of Africa, lead the same\nmode of life, though they cannot boast of the ancient origin and high\ndescent ascribed to the Arabs. Compared with Roman degeneracy, with\nthe corruption of the Byzantine court, with Assyrian effeminacy, and\nthe immorality of the great Asiatic cities, this tribe-character of\nthe Arabians, as preserved in its purity during their ancient freedom,\nappears undoubtedly to be of a less corrupt, more moral and more\ngenerous nature. Doubtless the Arabs possessed in the first ages of\ntheir history, a great moral energy of will and strength of character,\nand, even in the period of their decline, these qualities are still\nperceptible. On the other hand in this _tribe-character_, and in\nthose feelings of clanship, which determine all the social relations\namong that people; pride, party-animosities, and the spirit of\nrevenge, are the ruling elements of life, and the passions to which\nall things are made subservient, or are sacrificed. The moral\ncorruption of the human race, the profound disorder of man's whole\nbeing, is proved as well by the constant proneness of civilized\nnations towards a soft voluptuousness of morals, or by the innate\ndisposition of politer classes and ages to a spirit of speculative\ncontention, as by the rude pride and animosities of tribes, which\nconsidered in a natural point of view, appear to be purer and less\ncorrupt in their morals, or to possess greater strength and generosity\nof character. Those tribe-feelings and passions of pride and hatred,\nanger and revenge, so prevalent among the Arabians, are displayed in\ntheir ancient poetry, and even constitute its essential spirit and\npurport; for except those parables, riddles, and proverbial sayings in\nwhich the Orientals so much delight, this poetry has no mythological\nfictions, like that of the Indians and the Greeks, nor with the\nexception of a certain enthusiasm of passion, does it evince any truly\nfertile and inventive power of imagination.\n\nThe old Arabians never possessed, like the Indians, Egyptians, and\nGreeks, a poetical, high-wrought, and scientifically arranged system\nof Polytheism. The historical traditions of their different races had\nmuch analogy with those of the Hebrews, and coincided with them in a\nvariety of points; for as they were of the Semitic race, they deduced\ntheir origin from Abraham and the other holy Patriarchs of the\nprimitive world. Hence the tradition of a purer faith, and the simple,\npatriarchal worship of the Deity, appear to have never been totally\nextinguished among the Arabs; though indeed the veracious Herodotus\nasserts, that they adored the Assyrian Venus under the name of\nAlilath. But such a mixture of religious doctrines and practices is by\nno means incredible, when we reflect on those periods in the history\nof the Hebrews, when though that people were in possession of the\nMosaic revelation and code of laws, and though their whole arrangment\nof life were founded thereon; though mighty and zealous prophets\nperpetually arose to warn them of their errors; they still went after\nBaal, and still sacrificed their children to Moloch. In the age of\nMahomet, and shortly before his time, various kinds of idolatry had\nfound their way among the Arabs from the neighbouring nations, who if\nnot now, had formerly been plunged in the errors of Paganism. At the\nsame time several Jewish tribes existed in Arabia, and even some\nChristian communities, belonging mostly to the Oriental sects, mingled\nwith the rest of the population. The neighbouring Christian monarch,\nor Negus of \u00c6thiopia, also exerted considerable influence on the\ndifferent tribes and communities of Arabia.\n\nMahomet felt the most decided aversion to all Pagan idolatry, and even\nto all veneration of images; and it is very possible, according to the\nopinion of a great historian, who on the whole does not judge the\nArabian prophet unfavourably, that the expectation which the Jews\nstill entertained of the future coming of a Deliverer and Prophet,\nshould have operated very powerfully on the mind and imagination of\nMahomet. In the same way as the Jews, then incomparably more active\nthan afterwards, still expected _Him_ who had long since come; so\ncertain Christian sects, totally misunderstanding the Scriptures,\nwhich they interpreted according to their own arbitrary sense,\nbelieved that the Holy Ghost and the divine Paraclete whom the Saviour\nhad promised, was yet to come; although the Saviour had promised that\nthe Holy Spirit should come down upon his disciples, immediatly after\nhis ascension, and had added, that the same spirit should for ever\nabide with them. Now every one who professed himself a Christian, knew\nvery well from the Holy Scriptures, that a supernatural light had\ndescended on the Apostles in the first assembly they held, and\nwhen, as they thought, their Lord and Master had abandoned them; and\nthat this light had transformed the disciples, till then weak,\nwavering, and trembling before the world, into apostolic men filled\nwith the spirit of God, into prophets of eternal truth and divine\nlove, humble, but energetic, and no less heroic than enlightened. That\nAssister and Comforter, or that guiding Paraclete promised by God to\nhis disciples, which in the Apostles had proved itself a spirit of\nknowledge, of illumination, and of insight into the mysteries of\nfaith--in the martyrs, a spirit of divine power and of heroic\nconstancy under sufferings, was now in the great doctors of the\nchurch, and in the general councils the guiding spirit of wisdom,\nrightly discerning and steadfastly adhering to the truths of\nrevelation. But this truth did not prevent many leaders of those sects\nfrom regarding themselves in their own conceit as the Comforter and\nthe Paraclete promised by God for the consolation of succeeding ages,\nor even from permitting themselves to be so considered by their own\ndisciples. The supposition of the great historian just now cited, that\nthese Jud\u00e6o-Christian expectations of the future coming of an earthly\nDeliverer, Redeemer and Teacher, or Prophet of the world, may have\nexerted no inconsiderable influence on the mind of Mahomet, and may\nhave awakened similar conceptions and imaginations in his own head, is\nconfirmed by the fact, that the Koran itself contains no very obscure\nallusions and references to the notion of the Paraclete, and to a\nsupernatural and divine power and force under the very denomination\nused among the later Hebrews, and according to the very word\nsanctioned for that peculiar object.\n\nIn the time of Mahomet, and shortly before him, the Caaba at Mecca\nconstituted the great sanctuary of Arabian worship. This, if we may so\ndesignate it, was a simple chapel of Pagan pilgrimage, which contained\nthe black stone, the object of the religious devotion of the Arabs\nfrom a very ancient period. The idolatrous worship of such shapeless\nor conical blocks of stone was by no means unknown to the wayward\ngenius of ancient Polytheism. We meet with a similar form of idolatry\nin the mythology of the Greeks, though set off and embellished by the\npeculiar fancy of that people; and instances of a like kind were to be\nfound in the worship which the neighbouring people of Syria paid to\nBelus or Baal. Those stones which are frequently mentioned by ancient\nhistorians as having fallen from Heaven, may probably have given rise\nto this peculiar species of idolatry; and the fact itself (as now\nindeed is often the case with the general traditions of antiquity) is\nsufficently proved by the existence of those well-known meteor-stones,\nwhose origin, though they have undergone chemical analysis, and\nmineralogical investigation, still remains, even in the present\nadvanced state of modern science, a problem of no small difficulty.\n\nThe Arabian tribe from which Mahomet was sprung, had long been\nintrusted with the care and custody of the Caaba and the black stone,\nand placed its highest glory in this its allotted dignity. According\nto the Arabian tradition, Abraham had first erected the Caaba, and the\nAmalecites had afterwards repaired it. When the tribe of Koreish, who\nwere invested with this high charge, had to rebuild this temple; they\nwere at a loss to know how the sacred black stone should be fixed in\nthe walls, and what hand should touch the consecrated piece, when\nquite unexpectedly, this honour fell to the lot of Mahomet, then a\nstripling of fifteen. For this reason we may well suppose that this\nancient seat of Arabian worship--the Caaba--produced one of those\nyouthful impressions that determined the future destiny of this\nextraordinary man. Even in the religious system which he afterwards\nfounded, this ancient sanctuary with its magical stone, has remained\nin every age a high object of veneration; and it is only in our times\nthat the temple of Mecca has been exposed to the rage of the\n_Wechabites_, who though their religious fury has taken an\nopposite course, exhibit the old Arabian character in all its\nfanatical violence. But this old black stone-idol is a very remarkable\nfeature in the history of Mahomet and of his religion. In the holy\ntemple of the Caaba were kept and suspended the seven most remarkable\npoems which had won the prize over the other tribe-songs of the\nArabs,--a species of poetry peculiar to this people, and breathing all\nthe enthusiasm of pride and hatred. In these compositions, Mahomet\nheld a very distinguished rank, and long before he announced himself\nas a prophet, his poetry, which far outshone that of his competitors,\nhad raised him to a high degree of honour and consideration. It was\nonly in the fortieth or forty-second year of his age, and after a long\nand solitary abode in a cavern during what the Mahometans term, \"the\nnight of divine decrees,\" that Mahomet formed the first determination,\nand thought he felt the first inward calling to the mission of a\nprophet. The first person that believed in this mission, and\nacknowledged him for a prophet, was his own wife Cadijah, who, though\na rich widow, had bestowed her hand on Mahomet, when his sole\npatrimony consisted of five camels and an Ethiopian maid-servant, and\nhad thus raised him to a station of wealth and independence. It is\nworthy of notice, that it is only in the epileptic fits to which he\nwas subject, that he is represented as having mysterious colloquies\nwith the angel Gabriel. Others represent him as a lunatic; and in\nconnection with this charge I may mention the story, that he wished to\npass with his disciples as a person transfigured in a supernatural\nlight, and that the credulity of his followers saw the moon, or the\nmoon's light descend upon him, pierce his garments, and replenish him.\nThat veneration for the moon, which still forms a national or rather\nreligious characteristic of the Mahometans, may perhaps have its\nfoundation in the elder superstition, or Pagan idolatry of the Arabs.\n\nModern historians have often complained of the difficulty of\nascertaining the precise truth in the history of Mahomet, from the\nseverity of his opponents on the one hand, and the enthusiastic\nadmiration of his Eastern partisans, on the other. If we think proper\nto follow those writers only, who by their acquaintaince with the\nlanguage have copied from Arabic authorities, we shall find that their\nnarratives are much distorted by fanaticism, and rendered almost\nunintelligible by an absurd exaggeration. Independently of the evident\ntraces in this religion of a demoniacal influence and operation;\nundoubted historical facts will furnish us with sufficient data for\nforming a clear and definitive opinion on the character of Mahomet and\nthe nature of his religion. Although the Arabs of that age, like other\nnations of that time, and the ancient Hebrews, universally thought\nthat supernatural works were to be expected from a prophet; and that\nthe high power of miracles was necessary to prove a divine mission;\nyet Mahomet found it more fitting or convenient to declare, that he\ncould dispense with the aid of miracles, as he came not to found a new\nreligion, but to restore the purity of the old--the faith of Abraham,\nand the other Patriarchs. Even though we had not such clear and\npositive historical proofs and testimonies, respecting the nature of\nthat presentient faith of Abraham, and the other Patriarchs of the Old\nTestament--a faith which pointed to all the mysteries of\nfuturity--still to suppose that the religion of those pious Fathers of\nhoar antiquity, were nothing more than that system of (so called)\npure, but in reality shallow, and meaningless, Theism, which the\npretended Arabian Reformer has announced to the world, would be little\nconsonant with probability, and little conformable to the nature and\nmarch of the human mind. Considered in its true internal spirit, and\ndivested of its outward garb of oriental customs and symbolical\nlanguage, the religion of Mahomet on a closer investigation will be\nfound rather to bear a stronger affinity to the inane and superficial\nphilosophy of the eighteenth century; and if that philosophy were\nhonest and consistent, it would not hesitate loudly to proclaim and\nopenly to revere Mahomet, if not as a prophet, still as a real\nReformer of mankind, the first promulgator and mighty teacher of\ntruth, and the founder of the pure religion of reason.\n\nSuch a dead empty Theism, such a mere negative Unitarian faith, is\nlittle adapted for the true purposes of a religion, though it may form\nthe basis of some scholastic system of Rationalist Theology. Regarded\nas a religious system, the creed of Mahomet is neither old nor new;\nbut is in part perfectly void and meaningless, and in part composed of\nvery mixed materials. The part in it which is new, is that fanatic\nspirit of conquest it has inculcated and diffused through the world;\nand that part in it which is old, is copied from the Hebrew traditions\nand the Christian revelation, or contains allusions to the one or to\nthe other, including some old Arabian customs and usages which this\nreligion has still retained.\n\nIn the first infancy of the Mahometan faith, and during the first\ndisputes and wars which occurred about that religion, a number of\nMahomet's followers were obliged to seek refuge in \u00c6thiopia, when the\nChristian monarch of that country asked them whether they were\nChristians. They cited in reply several passages from the sayings and\npoems of their prophet, relating to the Saviour, to his birth, and to\nthe Virgin Mary. In these the Prophet spoke of the birth and origin\nof our Saviour, as of a Gnostic eradiation or emanation of divine\npower; and though such language was by no means consonant with the\nChristian doctrine of the divinity of Christ, yet it was calculated to\nproduce on the minds of some of the Eastern sectaries a very false and\ndeceitful impression. Favourable to Christianity as some of these\nexpressions might at first sight appear to the ignorant; there was\nmuch again that betrayed a spirit of the most decided hostility\ntowards the Christian religion. Even the prohibition of wine was\nperhaps not so much intended for a moral precept, which, considered in\nthat point of view, would be far too severe, as for answering a\nreligious design of the founder; for he might hope that the express\ncondemnation of a liquid which forms an essential element of the\nChristian sacrifice, would necessarily recoil on that sacrifice\nitself, and thus raise an insuperable barrier between his creed, and\nthe religion of Christ. The peculiar spirit and true character of any\nreligious system, must be judged not so much by the letter of its\nprofessed doctrines, as by its practice and prevailing usages. And\nthus that established custom is extremely remarkable, which makes it\nimperative on every Jew, who may wish to become a Mahometan,\npreviously to receive the rite of baptism. Thus did Mahomet think to\nstand upon the basis of Christianity; and while addressing the Arabs,\nhe appealed solely to the religion of their first ancestor, and of\nthe other Patriarchs, he assigned in his graduated scale of\nrevelation, the first degree to Judaism, the second to Christianity,\nand the third and highest to his own Islam. That he was a mere\nfanatic, and entirely devoid of all ambitious or political views, I\ncannot admit; and although he himself had even been more unconscious\nof a deliberate hostility towards the mysteries of the true religion,\n_another_ may have inspired him with that subtle design.\n\nSuch then was this new, or as the founder himself styled it, this pure\nold doctrine of all-conquering Islam and of all-surpassing faith,\nwhich this pretended restorer of the religion of Abraham--this false\nParaclete of misconceived promise and idle phantasy, brought and\nannounced to the world:--_a prophet without miracles_--_a faith\nwithout mysteries_--_and a morality without love_, which has\nencouraged the thirst of blood, and which began and terminated in the\nmost unbounded sensuality. Supposing even, that one of the leading\npoints in this system of morals, the re-establishment of polygamy to\nsuch a wide extent, and at a period of the world when this institution\nwas formally abolished among many nations, and among others had fallen\ninto disuse, could be in some measure excused by the customs of Asia,\nthe wants of climate, and the general prejudices of the nation, or\nother like cause;--what must we think of a code of morals professing\nto be divine, which in opposition to the Christian doctrine of the\npure happiness enjoyed by the celestial spirits in the intuition of\nGod, and to which man must even in this life, aspire by vigilant\npreparation, if he wishes to render himself worthy of that state--can\nform no other ideal of supreme felicity--can devise no other expedient\nto fill up the immense void which this religion has left in the\nsupernatural world, than a boundless Harem--a paradise of lust,\nportrayed in the most glowing colours of sensuality!\n\nThat part of the Mussulman morality relating to our fellow-beings, the\nprecept of alms-deeds which it prescribes, is the only part entitled\nto praise, which we willingly accord; and we sincerely trust, that not\nmerely the commandment, but the custom and practice of charity among\nChristians may never prove inferior. But in every other respect, this\nreligion permits not only hatred and vengeance, in opposition to that\nChristian precept so repeatedly inculcated, and so deeply engraven on\nour minds--the pardon of our enemies; but it encourages, and even\ncommands irreconcileable hostility, eternal warfare, eternal\nslaughter, to propagate thoughout the world a belief in this\nblood-stained prophet of pride and lust. Perhaps all the Heathen\nnations put together, in the long series of ages, have not offered to\ntheir false gods so many human victims, as in this new Arabian\nidolatry have been sacrificed to this highly extolled, anti-Christian\nprophet. For the essence of idolatry is not in names or in words, in\nrites or in sacrifices; but in the nature of things, in the actual\ntransactions of life, in unchristian customs, and anti-christian\nsentiments; and there is even that old black stone-idol, of which I\nsaid before in a figurative sense, that it has ever remained firmly\nfixed in the religion of Mahomet. The commencement of this religion\nwas not marked by any contest about mysteries of faith, or points of\ndoctrine; but by combats of another kind more congenial to the spirit\nof the Arabs, by a war which broke out between the party of Mahomet,\nand the hostile tribe which refused to acknowledge him for a prophet,\nand whose refusal occasioned his flight from Mecca. In this contest he\ndrew the sword, fought courageously against the unbelievers, and by\noverpowering by force of arms all who refused to recognize him as a\nprophet, thought to prove his divine mission. He met however with much\nresistance, and had many factions to overcome, before he succeeded in\nsubduing the various tribes of his nation. This contest lasted for ten\nyears, up to the very moment of his death, when he died master of all\nArabia. Shortly before that event, he wrote very insolent letters to\nthe Emperor Heraclius, and to the great king of Persia, summoning them\nto acknowledge him for a Prophet, and to believe in his mission. Both\ngave rather evasive replies, than positive refusals;--so great was the\nterror which this new power of Hell had already struck into the world.\n\nImmediately on the death of Mahomet, a great contest arose among his\ndisciples. On one side Ali, his son-in-law, by marriage with his\ndaughter Fatima, and on the other Abubeker, his father-in-law, whose\ndaughter Ayesha was the surviving widow of the Prophet, and who was\nafterwards succeeded by Omar, contended with all the might of their\nrespective adherents for superiority and dominion; and this bloody\nfamily-quarrel, which distracted the very infancy of the Arabian\nEmpire, has produced among Mahometan nations a long and protracted\nreligious schism, which has continued down to the present day. This\nwas originally a mere personal dispute, and not a dogmatic controversy\nas among Christian sects; for the religion of Mahomet furnishes no\nmatter for such controversies, as in reality it contains little of a\ndoctrinal nature, and recognizes no dogmas but the two contained in\nthe seven Arabic words of the well-known symbol of Islam:--\"There is\nno God but God, and Mahomet is the Apostle of God.\" The one of these\nis a declaration of the self-evident tenet of the unity of God, but\nlevelled indirectly against the Christian dogma of the Trinity; while\nthe other expresses the divine mission of Mahomet, and by calling\nforth a veneration that leads to the contempt and rejection of all\nthings besides, has in a practical point of view, really established a\nnew species of idolatry. Abubeker and Omar asserted that they alone\nwere the legitimate Caliphs and successors of Mahomet; and as the\nPartisans of Ali rejected the supplement founded on oral tradition, to\nthe poems and maxims of the Prophet, they were stigmatized as\nschismatics by the opposite party. In Persia, the sect of Ali has\nremained predominant down to the present day; and as in that country,\nthe ancient traditions and old national poetry have been partly\npreserved, and have been combined in a very peculiar manner with the\ntenets of Mahometanism, many bolder, freer, and less contracted\nnotions have found their way among this people. Hence it is very\npossible that on a closer investigation, we could discover a great\ndifference in the intellectual character of these two sects, not so\nmuch perhaps in religious doctrines, about which there is here little\nroom for enquiry, as in moral feelings and views of life.\n\nThe progress of the Arabian conquests was not checked by these\ninternal disputes. Five years after the death of Mahomet, and fifteen\nfrom the commencement of the Hegira, the city of Jerusalem was\nconquered by the arms of the Arabs; and in the eighteenth year of the\nsame era, Egypt became a Mussulman province. The thirtieth year of the\nHegira was not yet terminated, before the whole Empire of Persia was\nsubdued, and its last monarch of the race of the Sassanides, Yezdegerd\nhad perished in foreign parts, a suppliant and a fugitive. In the\nfiftieth year of the Hegira, Arabian vessels menaced and beseiged\nConstantinople, which was indebted for its deliverance chiefly to the\nuse of the Greek fire. In the ninetieth year of the same era, while on\none side the Arabs extended their victorious arms over India, they\nsubverted on the other the Visigoth kingdom in Spain and Portugal, and\nbecame masters of the whole Hesperian Peninsula, as far as those\ninaccessible mountains, in whose fastnesses a fugitive remnant of the\nruling Goths, and of the old inhabitants of the country had intrenched\nthemselves, thence to carry on that struggle for freedom, which till\nthe final conquest of Granada, and the complete expulsion of the Moors\nfrom Spain, lasted for a period of eight hundred years. After the\ndownfal of the first dynasty of Caliphs of the house of Ommiyah, and\nthe subsequent accession of the Abbassides to the empire, a separate\nand independent Caliphate was established in Mussulman Spain, and\nlasted there for several ages. The Arabs had scarce achieved the\nconquest of Spain, when they aspired to the possession of the\nVisi-Goth and Burgundian provinces of France. But a term was at last\nput to the progress of their arms, by the mighty victory which the\nFrank hero, Charles Martel, gained between Tours and Poitiers, over\ntheir General Abderame, who fell on the field with the flower of his\ntroops, in the twentieth year after the conquest of Spain, and in the\nhundred and tenth year of the Hegira. Thus did the arm of Charles\nMartel save and deliver the Christian nations of the West, from the\ndeadly grasp of all-destroying Islam. In Asia the universal dominion\nof the Arabs was more and more firmly consolidated, and the second of\nthe Abbassides, Almansor, erected the city of Bagdad, or the new\nBabylon, not far from the country where the old was situated, and\nwhich was thenceforth the vast metropolis of an immense empire.[5]\n\nThe new religion and conquests of the Arabs may be considered in the\nlight of a new migration of nations, as no inconsiderable portion of\nthe Moorish population passed into Spain; and this Arabian migration\nhas exerted in Asia in Africa, a far more extensive influence on\nempire, language, manners, political institutions, and intellectual\ncultivation, than the invasion of the Germanic tribes has exercised in\nEurope. When we compare the immigrations of the Germanic tribes with\nthose of the Arabs, and consider the violence which characterized the\nlatter, the pernicious influence they have exerted on the human mind,\nand on civilization, and the despotism they have invariably introduced\ninto political and domestic society, we may look upon the migrating\ntribes of Germany, almost as Colonies, which though originally they\npartook of a warlike character, yet inclined more and more and to a\npeaceful nature, and ultimately assumed that spirit, when the tumult\nof intermediate anarchy had subsided, and Christianity had more\nintimately blended and finally incorporated the new settlers and the\nold inhabitants.\n\nAs the divine author of Christianity had promised his disciples, that\nthe high power of God should ever abide with them, should guide and\ndefend them; and that the assisting and counselling Spirit of truth,\nof peaceful order, and of active zeal should never be removed from\nthem; the efficay of this divine promise was now manifested during\nthis intermediate period of anarchy; and though in a different form\nfrom what it appeared in the earlier ages of the church, yet was it\nperfectly adapted to the exigencies of the time. The great problem of\nthe age was first in this new agglomeration of nations, to endeavour\nto allay the agitated elements of society, till after that agitation\nhad subsided, they should grow and strengthen into organic life and\nform; and next, to preserve the heritage of European science and\nletters, and thus sow the seeds of a richer and more flourishing\nharvest for future ages. And to effect this by the mild and genial\ninfluence of Christianity, was the object, the task, and the work of\nthe distinguished ecclesiastics, bishops, dignitaries, and other\napostolic men of those ages. The two great popes, Leo and Gregory,\nshone conspicuous above all their contemporaries, and were in that\nperiod of anarchy, a pillar of strength and a shield of safety to\nafflicted Rome and Italy--the guardians of European society and of\nChristian science. Both by their practical and instructive writings,\nare considered as the last of the ancient fathers; and Leo even is\nremarkable for great purity of diction and force of eloquence. In\npoint of science and learning, the succeeding bishops and dignitaries\nof the church cannot indeed be compared with the ancient fathers; but\non the other hand, they united with a true Christian piety a practical\nsense that never failed to discern everywhere what was fitting for the\nemergency of the moment. The Monastic schools founded by St. Benedict\nwere indeed of a very different nature from the primitive eremitical\ninstitutes of Egypt; and entirely adapted to the exigencies of Europe\nin that age, they were the asylums and seminaries of learning and\nphilosophic contemplation; and while they promoted the interests of\neducation, they were equally conducive to the progress of agriculture.\nA number of works have sufficiently shewn how much the influence of\nthe Benedictine order, which for many centuries extended over all the\ncountries of the West, has advanced the intellectual civilization of\nmodern Europe, and indeed sown its first seeds.\n\nBy Bishop Boniface the Christian religion was established and widely\ndiffused in the interior of Germany. At an earlier period, other holy\nmen animated with an apostolic zeal, forty of whom were sent by Pope\nGregory the Great, carried the light of the gospel into Britain;\nwhere it was received with peculiar avidity by the Picts and Scots,\nand the old inhabitants of Erin, as well as by the Anglo-Saxons. In\ntrue Christian piety, and in such knowledge and science as the age\npossessed, England during this Saxon period, prior and down to the\nreign of Alfred, maintained nearly a pre-eminence above the other\nkingdoms of the West. Even that apostle of the Germans, Boniface,\noriginally named Winfried, came from England; and among the writers of\nthe age, Alcuin asserted the intellectual superiority of the\nAnglo-Saxon Christians. Limited as was the knowledge of the Western\nworld in those ages, and narrow the circle of European science and\nlearning, still we find in those times, but almost only in the West,\nwriters of very original powers, and peculiar turn of mind, whose\nwritings, composed either in a barbarous Latin, or in a half-formed\nRomanic vernacular tongue, are the faithful and instructive mirrors of\nthe spirit of the times. On the other hand, the later Byzantine\nwriters, though they possessed incomparably greater resources, and\nmuch more extensive philological acquirements, have produced nothing\nbut learned compilations.\n\nNow there arose in the West, Christian kings, heroes and legislators,\nboth among the Franks and the Saxons, such as Charlemagne and Alfred,\nwho as men were not indeed faultless, but who should be judged and\nappreciated according to the character of their times; a knowledge of\nwhich is necessary for rightly understanding the spirit of these\nextraordinary men. In peace and in war they endeavoured firmly to\nestablish a new model society on Christian principles and maxims; and\nthey restored the Western in the form of a great Christian Empire,\ndestined to defend and protect all Christian states--all the civilized\nnations of the European Confederacy against Barbarian invasion and\ninternal anarchy.\n\nIf we compare these Frank and Saxon Kings and Emperors, valiant and\nchivalrous as they were, thirsting for glory, yet seeking and\nestablishing peace, honouring justice, and founding or restoring laws,\non one hand with those Saracen rulers and caliphs, ever burning with a\nrage for conquest and destruction, and on the other hand, with that\nByzantine court, presenting almost always the uniform picture of\ncorruption, and ruling over an empire pining in hopeless decay--if we\ncontrast those flashes of genius which distinguished the writings of\nthe Western nations, with the dead, spiritless monotony pervading all\nthe productions of the Byzantine intellect, superior as the Greeks\nwere to the rest of Europe in erudition, science and literary stores;\nwe shall find in this comparison, (taking into consideration the\nimperfection of all human things, and actions, and persons, for even\nin this period of the world, errors and defects are to be found in the\nconduct of individuals mixed up with the most praiseworthy\nqualities,) we shall find, I say, in this comparison, the best\nvindication and the highest eulogium of the Catholic West and its\nearlier history. The misrepresentation of that history formerly so\nfrequently made by the passion, the exaggerations, and the prejudices\nof party, has still an injurious influence, but is with us no longer\nin season; for the moment has arrived, when fixed in the right centre,\nwe must now begin to take a more complete and comprehensive survey of\nthe primitive world, and classical antiquity, next of the history of\nthe middle age, and of modern times, down to the present day, and to\nthat approaching futurity still in the crisis of its formation; and\nwhen we must judge them with more correctness in all their details,\nand understand them better by examining their relative position in the\ngreat plan of history, and estimate them all by the standard given to\nus by God, which is the only true one. Then we shall judge these\nparticulars without predilection, and without aversion, \"_sine odio et\nsine dilectione_,\" which is somewhat more than that excellent and\ngreatest of all ancient historians, who gave utterance to this saying,\nreally accomplished, or was indeed in his time and with his principles\ncapable of accomplishing. For it is only the knowledge and complete\ncomprehension of the great scheme of history, which can enable us to\nrise above the particular transactions of our own, or of a foreign\nnation, of the present times or of past ages; and it is this\nknowledge which can alone clearly and safely determine the feeling\nwith which we should regard particular historical facts. But for that\nend, the ancient historian, as well as all antiquity, wanted the clue\nwhich Christianity alone has given us, to the internal connexion of\nthe world's history, and which they who seek for it elsewhere but in\nthis religion, will certainly seek in vain.\n\nIn this period of anarchy, and during the sway of the Lombards, the\ncircumstances of the times gave to the Popes a paramount authority in\nthe internal administration of the city and district of Rome; as well\nas a general political influence over all Italy;--an influence which\nwas for the most part very salutary, and tended effectually to ensure\nthe public peace and prosperity. I must here observe that this\npolitical position and power of the Popes, so naturally adapted to the\ncircumstances of the times, and to the general situation of the\nWestern world, was first put in a clear and correct point of view by\nwriters not belonging to the Catholic church. For the political\nhistorians on the Catholic side have, in almost every country,\nretained too lively a recollection of the warm disputes as to the\nrespective limits and rights of the ecclesiastical and secular power,\nnot to be swayed by such feelings in their conception and accounts of\nan age long gone by; and this has certainly weakened the impartiality\nbecoming the tribunal of history.\n\nAfter the subversion of the Ostro-Goth dominion in Italy, the disgrace\nor even dissatisfaction of the Byzantine General, Narses, provoked the\nincursion of the Lombards into Italy. This people were not so\nexclusively devoted to the Arian party, as a portion of them, and\nseveral among their kings, professed the Catholic religion; but they\nwere far from possessing the mild, generous character of the Goths,\nand their sway often proved oppressive in Italy. Yet every thing\nappeared more desirable and more tolerable in the opinion of many\notherwise unprejudiced historians, than the impending danger of\nByzantine rule. When in the middle of the seventh century, the Greek\nEmperor Constans II. waged war in Italy against the Lombards, and in\nthe course of the war conquered Rome, the plunder, especially of the\ntreasures of ancient art, was so immense, that compared with these\nGreek devastations, all the earlier and destructive ravages of the\nGoths appeared to be nothing. The ships which were conveying to\nConstantinople all these plundered treasures of art, fell into the\nhands of the Arabs, and were destroyed, so that it was never known\nwhat became of their valuable freight. So true it is, that Rome\nperished solely and entirely by her own hand, by internal discord, and\nthe weight of her own corruption, and not by the hands of Germans or\nof Goths.\n\nWhen at the commencement of the eighth century, the dominion of the\nrude Lombards became oppressive, and the Greek sway under the\nIconoclast Leo was still more detested, and all the cities and\nprovinces of Italy had revolted against it; Pope Gregory II. without\nany previous concert, and by unanimous consent, was placed at the head\nof the Italian league, and declared its chief; but he warned his\ncountrymen against the dangers of precipitation, exhorted them to the\nmaintenance of peace, and ever cherished the hope of obtaining a\nfriendly reconciliation with the Byzantine Emperor. The rigid\nprohibition of the religious use of images was proper in those cases\nonly, where the use of them was not confined to a mere devotional\nrespect, but was likely to degenerate into a real adoration and\nidolatry, and where a strict separation from Pagan nations and their\nrites was a matter of primary importance, as was the case in the\nJewish dispensation of old. But now that the Mahomedan proscription,\nand scornful rejection of all holy emblems and images of devotion,\narose from a decidedly anti-christian spirit, that displayed itself\neither in open violence or secret machination against the Christian\nreligion; this Byzantine attack on images, and this furious war\nagainst all symbols of piety, which in its ulterior consequences might\nand must have proceeded to much greater lengths, can be regarded only\nas a mad contagion of the moral disease of the age. This disorder and\nphrenzy indeed subsided; and the Greeks of the Byzantine Empire in\ntheir religious rites, as well as dogmas, have remained Christians,\nand faithful to the old Christian traditions. Yet this controversy on\nthe use of images, and the animosites and jealousies which it\nenkindled between the Christians of the East and West, did not a\nlittle contribute to that perfectly groundless, irrational, and\nunhappy schism which has severed the Greeks from the universal church.\n\nThe protracted contest between the kings of Lombardy and the Greek\nExarchs of Ravenna, (during whose disputes the Popes felt the calling\nand inclination, but had not the power, to exercise the high functions\nof Protectors to oppressed Italy,) naturally provoked the arbitration\nof the Franks, led to the establishment of their Protectorate over\nItaly, and was thus the first occasion of the restoration of the\nWestern Empire, and of the foundation of the great Christian imperial\nmonarchy. The sublime idea of such an empire sprang solely and\nentirely out of circumstances and events, as they arose, and had not\nby any individual been fully anticipated, much less clearly\nunderstood. Hence we cannot attribute to any persons the blame or\nentire merit of events that really took place of themselves, by the\nmere force of circumstances, the spirit of the times, and the happy\nimpulse of a lofty inspiration. Nor can we at this remote distance of\ntime, and under circumstances so totally dissimilar, institute a\nformal discussion (in the manner of the Jurists) on the lawfulness or\nunlawfulness of any particular measure in this great series of public\nacts. No country besides was oppressed by so many and such contending\nrulers, as that Italy which had once bowed all nations beneath her\nyoke. Sicily, which had been conquered by the Arabs, laboured under\nthe most cruel oppression; and it was the tyrannical conduct of the\nGreek governors that had paved the way for the conquest of that\nisland. In the third century, the Franks had already migrated into\nGaul; their rulers were from the origin of their empire most devoted\nto Christianity; and had besides in their conduct towards kindred or\nneighbouring nations, evinced a more judicious, prudent, and\nsystematic policy, than had been shewn by any other Germanic or Gothic\ntribe, in the invasion and subsequent government of the Roman\nprovinces. This nation, which from its origin had ever been warmly\nattached to the Catholic church, which had subdued the Visi-Goth\nkingdom in Gaul, had become masters of the Burgundian provinces, while\nit perpetually strove to extend and consolidate its dominion in the\ninterior of Germany; was now, after its splendid victory over the\nSaracens, and the general protection which this victory had ensured to\nall Christendom, called into Italy, less by the Pope and the Romans,\nthan by the state of affairs, and the urgency of times and\ncircumstances, there to terminate anarchy, and re-establish the\nancient order of things, or one better adapted to the exigencies\nof the age. The Empire of the Franks was henceforward the most\npowerful state in the West, and was indeed the great centre of the\ncivilized world; as afterwards became, though on a higher and more\nextended scale, the great Christian Empire of the middle age in\nGermany and in Italy. Here we find that high clue in human history to\nwhich we should ever adhere--on one side, the luminous trace of the\nmore immediate providence of God--and on the other, the gradual\nunfolding of the human mind, evinced in science as in language, in\nfeelings as in modes of thinking--an intellectual developement, which\nthough often concealed, and, as it were, buried beneath the agitated\nsurface of external events, forms (together with the conduct of divine\nprovidence,) the real and essential matter and purport in the history\nand progress of human communities. In this respect, if we regard\neither of the then two great rival powers in the East, we shall find\nthat neither the dead monotony of the Byzantine Empire, sinking ever\nlower in the scale of moral, political and intellectual degradation,\nnor the more hasty growth and the internal distraction of the\nSaracenic Empire, (presenting, as it does, in its long series of\npolitical catastrophes, military revolutions, and frequent changes of\ndynasty, the same tedious uniformity of despotism,) will furnish much\nmatter of interest or of moment to the philosophic historian. It is in\nthis period of the world, the gradual organization of the Christian\nstate, as in a later age, the developement of Christian science,\nwhich chiefly commands our regard, naturally so curious after all that\nrelates to the concerns and destinies of mankind, and fixes our\nattention exclusively, or more particularly, on that European West,\nwhere all now displayed a fuller life, and a more constant movement\nand activity.\n\nThe territorial partitions, and the various feuds and dissensions\nwhich occurred between the Frank kings, possess but little, or at best\na subordinate interest, amid the great events of the times--it is the\nleading idea of the age, the progressive march of society at this\nperiod, which offers matter of instruction to the historian. Many\nfaults and errors, however, stained the first execution of this grand\nplan of a Christian Empire;--such for instance, were those wars which\nCharlemagne waged against the Saxons, as well as similar wars under\nhis predecessors in the preceding age; for the propagation of the\nChristian religion by such means of coercion, can scarcely ever be\nexcused, and in no case entirely justified. The best excuse is perhaps\nin the fact, that all wars between tribes nearly allied, are like\nfamily disputes, usually conducted with greater stubbornness and\nanimosity. However, in the year 784, Charlemagne concluded with the\nSaxons a peace which was very advantageous to the latter; and the\nextremely prosperous and flourishing condition of the empire, and even\nof the countries in the North of Germany, under Henry the first king\nof the Saxon race, proves at least that the evil was confined within\nvery narrow limits, and had not been productive of such wide-spread\nand protracted desolation.\n\nIn the transition from the Carlovingian, to the Capetian dynasty, we\nshould not forget that the monarchy was not strictly hereditary in any\nGerman state, but was for the most part merely elective; and it was\nonly he, who had proved himself a valiant, prudent, and powerful\ndefender of his nation, that became the man of the public choice.\nRoyalty was then considered more in the light of an office, a charge,\na peculiar calling, than of an inheritance or patrimony. The general\nidea of the Christian Empire, was a universal protectorate over all\nChristian nations and countries--a mighty central dominion founded on\njustice, while the great connecting and pervading power of the whole\nsystem was supposed to reside in the perfect unity of religious\nprinciples. When this religious unity was destroyed, the whole\npolitical edifice fell to pieces; and in the struggles of later times,\nthe artificial relations founded on a mere mechanical balance of\npower, on a republican equality of states, without the foundation of\nChristian or any other solid principles, have furnished, as experience\nhas shewn, but a very bad substitute for that old Christian\nbrotherhood of the European states and nations; and have in the\ngeneral subversion of Christian morality, produced a sort of polite\ndisorder and refined anarchy.\n\nIn the partition of the Carlovingian Empire--a partition which was\nonly in accordance with those principles of descent which regulated\nthe inheritance of the great families--we can trace an almost heroic,\nand if we might use the expression, a na\u00efve patriarchal confidence in\nthe duration of that religious unity; for it was only on such a basis\nthat men deemed it possible to combine the advantage of the domestic,\ninternal government of a country limited in extent, with the controul\nof one general superintending monarchy. When a man of such consummate\nprudence, such long foresight, and powerful understanding as\nCharlemagne deemed such a scheme not impracticable, and thought it\npossible to maintain the political unity of his empire, under the\njoint dominion of his sons, and by their subordination to their eldest\nbrother; we should learn not to judge the plan with too much\nprecipitation, and according to the notions of our times, and our\npresent systems of policy. This first partition which Charlemagne had\ndesigned, was prevented by the hand of death. The entire division of\nthe whole Carlovingian Empire into three distinct portions, was first\neffected by Lewis the Pious; but the perpetual family dissensions\nwhich occurred under his successors, the weakness or violence of their\ncharacters, and the various factions which arose, rendered totally\nimpossible the maintenance of that union, which was originally sought\nto be perpetuated in the empire, and led to the final dismemberment\nand total dissolution of the old Empire of the Franks, when another\ndynasty succeeded to the imperial crown.\n\nIn the primitive monarchy of the Germans, however, the existence of\nthe four great national dutchies, which were subordinate to the\nimperial crown, far more happily accomplished this union of a local,\ndomestic, and paternal government with the controul of one powerful\nand superintending monarchy; so long at least as internal union\nsubsisted, and discord had not obtained the supremacy. There then\nexisted, though mostly in a different form than afterwards, a division\nof powers in the state as well as in the church; but unity in this\ndivision, or with this division, was sought for only in Christian and\nNational sentiments; and as long as these subsisted in their\nintegrity, the body politic remained unimpaired. At no time has a\npolitical constitution or mode of government been devised, which could\npermanently supply the place of principle.\n\nIn the national meetings of the great and smaller states of that age,\nin their assembled councils of dukes and princes, bishops, counts and\nlords, nobles and freemen (to whom were added the Commons of the\ncities, when by their rights and privileges they began to obtain\nimportance), we must look for the first germ of all the succeeding\nparliaments and states-general of the European nations, and of the\nrights of the different orders of society, and the privileges and\ncorporate immunities of the cities. All these rights and liberties\nwere purely local--they grew up on the root of national customs--they\nwere founded on no speculative theory of universal equality, but on\npositive usage, and special laws. The union and stability of an empire\nwas then sought for not in the balance of artificial forms, but in the\nholy heritage of ancient customs, in principle in short.\n\nOn this basis, first of Christian, then of national sentiments, do all\nChristian states repose; and when this foundation is destroyed, those\nstates are undone. Ecclesiastical power had then a real and\nsubstantial weight, and a very extended circle of operation; although\nits limits and relations with secular authority were not so rigidly\ncircumscribed as afterwards. To be sensible that this division of\npower will not necessarily impair the unity of strength and spirit in\nthe social frame, as long as principle remains pure, and religious\nconcord is preserved; we need only call to our recollection the fact,\nthat all Christian states and kingdoms have sprung from this happy\nagreement between secular and ecclesiastical authority, and that this\nunion was the sure foundation of their stability. And so long as both\npowers remained in harmonious accord, the times were prosperous, peace\nand justice ever increased, and the condition of nations was\nflourishing and happy. Christianity, says a great historian, who\nmanifests a greater predilection for antiquity, and even for the\noriental world, but whose comprehensive intellect often rightly\nappreciates the benign influence of this religion, which with us must\nhave the priority; Christianity was the electric spark which first\nroused the warlike nations of the North, rendered them susceptible of\na higher civilization, stamped the peculiar character, and founded the\npolitical institutions of modern nations, which have sprung out of\nsuch heterogeneous elements. And we may add, Christianity was the\nconnecting power which linked together the great community of European\nnations, not only in the moral and political relations of life, but in\nscience and modes of thinking. The church was like the all-embracing\nvault of heaven, beneath whose kindly shelter, those warlike nations\nbegan to settle in peace, and gradually to frame their laws and\ninstitutions. Even the office of instruction, the heritage of ancient\nknowledge, the promotion of science, and of all that tended to advance\nthe progress of the human mind, devolved to the care of the church,\nand were exclusively confined to the Christian schools. If science was\nthen of a very limited range, it was still quite proportioned to the\nexigencies and intellectual cultivation of the age; for mankind cannot\ntranscend all the degrees of civilization by a single bound, but must\nmount slowly and in succession its various grades; and at any rate,\nscience was not at that time unprofitably buried in libraries and in\nthe closets of the learned, as was afterwards the case in Europe, and\neven partly then among the Byzantines. The little knowledge which was\nthen possessed, was by the more active spirit, and the sound\nunderstanding and practical sense of the European nations, and their\nbetter priesthood, applied with general advantage to the interests of\nsociety. Science was not then, as in the later period of its proud\nascendancy, in open hostility with the pure dictates of faith and the\ninstitutions of life. On that world so variously excited in peace, as\nin war, and by the different pursuits of art and industry, useful\nknowledge and wholesome speculation descended, not like a violent\nflood, but like the soft distillations of the refreshing dew, or the\ngentle drops of fertilizing rain, from the Heaven of faith which\noverarched the whole.\n\n     [5] It may not perhaps be uninteresting to the reader\n     to compare with Schlegel's account of Mohammedanism, an\n     admirable, though briefer sketch of the same religion\n     by the hand of another great master--the illustrious\n     Goerres. In the Synopsis which he has published of the\n     Lectures on Universal History, that he has been for\n     several years delivering at Munich, we find the\n     following remarkable passage on the Mohammedan\n     religion. The author after speaking of the various\n     trials which the Christian church had to endure, says\n     \"Hence the young church must wrestle with all the forms\n     of error in the Gnostic doctrines and in the other\n     heresies; one after the other she remains the\n     triumphant conqueress over all, and maintains against\n     every attack her well-balanced equilibrium. At length,\n     when the contest has raged for centuries, the enemy\n     combines in one focus all the scattered rays of error;\n     and the Prophet of Mecca knows how to balance himself\n     therein. The _rigid Monotheism_ of his doctrine, which\n     by denying the Trinity, and with it all personal\n     manifestation of the Deity, limits its idea to the\n     depths of Eternity, without admitting any true or\n     living communication of the God-head with what\n     appertains to time, naturally allures the metaphysical\n     pride which in this abstraction hath made itself its\n     own God. The _ethical Pantheism_ which this religion\n     professes, while it furnishes a pretext, a motive and a\n     palliation to all the pretensions of the mighty, to the\n     ambition of usurpers, the violence of pride, and the\n     arrogance of tyranny, and at the same time consoles and\n     disarms the injured and the oppressed, by the\n     inevitableness of destiny, must draw to its preacher\n     the men of the sword, of violence, and of blood, and\n     link those once bound indissolubly to him. The _sensual\n     Eudaimonism_, to which his creed opens so free a scope\n     both in this world and the next, must rally round the\n     apostle of lust, the multitude that burns with all the\n     passionate glow of that fervid zone, and place under\n     his controul all the wild fiery energies of that\n     region. And thus do the cold doctrine, the cutting\n     steel, and the destroying flame go before him as his\n     missionaries; and the South and the East, and soon even\n     a part of the European West, are bowed under the yoke\n     of his religion: and while in the Caliphate he founds\n     for it a new spiritual and secular empire, the modern\n     world between Christianity and Mohammedanism becomes\n     divided into night and day.\"--Goerres Uber die\n     Grundlage der Weltgeschicte, page 99-100. _Breslaw_,\n     1830.--_Trans._\n\n\n\n\n                        END OF LECTURE XII.\n\n\n\n\n                           LECTURE XIII.\n\n\n  On the formation and consolidation of the Christian Government\n    in modern times.--On the principle which led to the\n    establishment of the old German Empire.\n\n\nThe first three centuries of the Christian era and of modern history\ncompose the epoch when, by a second fiat of creation, the light of\nChristianity spread through the whole Roman world, and when after\nundergoing long persecutions, the religion of Christ under Constantine\ncame victorious out of the struggle. The second epoch or the\nsucceeding five centuries comprehend that chaotic and intermediate\nstate in the history of mankind, or the transition from declining\nantiquity to modern times, growing out of the ruins of the ancient\nworld--the fermenting mixture of many and various elements of social\nlife. But when at last the tempest had disburthened itself of its\nfury, the clouds had broken asunder, and the pure firmament of\nChristian faith had stretched out its ample vault to shelter the rise\nof new communities; when the wild waters of that mighty inundation of\nnations had begun gradually to flow off; then the Germanic tribes\nincorporated with the Romanic nations, laid the deep firm soil on\nwhich modern European society was to spring up and flourish. For it\nwas Charlemagne who laid the sure foundation for Christian government,\nand all the improvements of its subsequent superstructure. On this\nbasis of Christian government, and Christian manners, and under the\ncover and vivifying influence of the luminous firmament of Christian\nfaith, sprang human science out of the small fragments of ancient art\nand learning, which had survived all these mighty devastations, till\nat last it expanded into a fuller bloom, and grew into a more heavenly\nand Christian form. This new progress of social man under the\nChristian form of government, and this progress of the human mind in\nChristian science, mark the third epoch of modern history, or the\nseven centuries which elapsed from the reign of Charlemagne, to the\ndiscovery of the New World, and the commencement of the Reformation.\nIt may naturally be supposed that these seven centuries which\nwitnessed the progressive civilization of modern nations, and the\nvigorous growth and wide spread of Christian principles, were at the\nsame time a period of struggle both in the state and in science, and\nthat in each of these departments, the spirit of Christianity was\nintermixed with, and most injuriously and fatally thwarted and opposed\nby, many unchristian elements. And indeed, to discover and\ndiscriminate between these conflicting elements, to comprehend and\ndetermine their mutual bearings one towards the other, is the fit\nproblem for historical philosophy. The progress of the Christian state\nand the advancement of Christian science, form during this period the\nmain subject of an universal history, when this is not a mere\ncollection of special or national histories, but truly universal, in\nthe philosophic sense of the term; treating solely of those subjects\ncommon to all mankind, or which illustrate the general march of\nhumanity. Hence all other historical views, dictated by a predilection\nfor one's own country--inquiries into the political institutions of\none, or several, or all existing states--a review of the circle of\nmercantile operations, and their gradual extension, and of the\nprogress of the mechanical arts--and lastly, curious and erudite\ndissertations on literature, philology and the fine arts (however\ninteresting, instructive, and in many respects useful, such special\ndissertations may be in themselves)--all these must be either entirely\nexcluded from general history, or must at least occupy a place very\nsubordinate to, and are deserving of notice only as far as they\nillustrate, what must ever constitute the main subject of the\nPhilosophy of History. In the first ages of the world, it is often\ndifficult to obtain satisfactory information, and a competent degree\nof certainty on the subjects which are alone, or at least chiefly,\nworthy of attention. But in modern times, it is a far more arduous\ntask to select out of the immense multitude and variety of facts\nsusceptible of historical proof, those which are of a general interest\nfor mankind, and amid the crowd of details steadily to preserve the\ngeneral outline of history.\n\nIt would be a great error to refer to the Christian constitution of\nthe state and of science, every remarkable or important incident in\nthe history of government and of science, merely because such\nincidents have occurred in the middle age, or among Christian nations\nof later times. We must strive to form a loftier idea of the Christian\nmodel both in science and in government, so that the highest and\nnoblest monuments in either, should from human infirmity be considered\nbut faint approximations, I do not say, to the unattainable standard\nof an imaginary perfection, but to the sober reality of Christian\ntruth. Although it is not possible rigidly to separate public life\nfrom public opinions, on account of the intimate union between both,\nand the mutual influence which government and science exercise over\none another; yet as the state is the groundwork for the cultivation of\nscience, and the former must precede the latter, I shall follow this\nhistorical order, and commence with the constitution of the Christian\nstate.\n\nAs here the question is not as to the _Beau Ideal_ of supreme\nperfection, or as to a precise, rigid, and scientific theory of the\nChristian state, (for which here at least, if not for the present age,\nthe time may not have arrived)--but merely as to a general outline of\nsuch a theory--I shall only observe, that the Christian state must\nrest on the basis of religious feelings. For without feeling its\nrelation to religion cannot be conceived--and such a mere relation,\nconsidered in itself, would lose its religious character. But the\ngovernment which is founded on Christianity, is on that account\nlimited, and is consequently in its very nature abhorrent either from\nabsolute despotism, or the uncontrolled tyranny of popular factions.\nIn the next place, the government founded on religion, is one in which\nsentiment, personal spirit, and personal character are the primary and\nruling elements, and not the dead letter, and the written formula of a\nmere artificial constitution. In this last respect one may say, that\nthe Christian government inclines very strongly towards monarchy; for\nin monarchy, it is the sacred person of the king, the character of the\nruler, the spirit of his administration, confidence in his person, and\nattachment to the hereditary dynasty, which form the basis, the\nanimating spirit, and vivifying principle of the social system. In a\nrepublic it is not the person, but the law which governs; nay, the\nwritten word of the law is there of the utmost importance; and thus\nthe dead letter of the constitution is in a republic almost as\nsacred, as in a monarchy the person called and consecrated to the\nfunctions of government by divine right. But more than this we should\nnot say--namely, that the Christian government, founded as it is on\npersonality and on sentiment, inclines _on the whole_ strongly\ntowards the monarchical form--a leaning which is by no means\nincompatible with many Republican usages and Republican Institutions\nof a subordinate kind. Still less should we exaggerate this idea so\nfar, as to maintain that the Christian government is entirely and\nnecessarily monarchical, even in its outward form; and that a Republic\nis objectionable at all times and under all circumstances without\ndistinction. Such absolutism in the doctrines of public law, and in\nthe theory of government, is very remote from true Christian\nprinciples. The unhistorical government of mere Reason--the\ndestructive principle of revolution--is indeed totally incompatible\nwith Christianity; principally because the Christian religion\ntolerates and recognizes all legal institutions, such as they are,\nwithout enquiring into their origin; (as the gospel not only left\ninviolate, but even respected the legality of the Roman dominion in\nthe conquered and incorporated countries;) and also because the\nChristian notion of right, like the Christian system of government, is\nby no means absolute, but is ever qualified by circumstances. A\nRepublican government, which is founded not so much on the abstract\nor rationalist principle of absolute freedom and equality, but on\nancient customs and hereditary rights, on freedom of sentiment and\ngenerosity of character, consequently on personality, is by no means\nessentially opposed to the true spirit of monarchy; still less is it\ninconsistent with the Christian theory of government. But a despotism,\nillegitimate not perhaps in its origin, but in its abuse of power,\nstrikes at the first principles of the Christian state, whose mild,\ntemperate, and historical character is as abhorrent from absolutism,\nas from the opposite principle of unqualified freedom and universal\nequality--the revolutionary principle, which involves the overthrow of\nall existing rights.\n\nAs in the Christian's estimation, the worth and excellence of an\nindividual is not to be judged by his outward appearance or by the\nobservance of certain forms, but by the sincerity of his inward\nsentiments; so the same observation will apply to states. It is the\nspirit and purpose of an action, the nature of a deed, the personal\nconduct displayed in a public measure; and not any outward form, which\nproves or determines the good or evil tendency of any important act,\nwhich may be the subject of history. That Christian tone and spirit\nwhich belongs to the government of the illustrious, but not immaculate\nCharlemagne, does not proceed from the circumstance, that he, like\nAlfred after him, solicited the counsels and co-operation of his\nBishops in framing laws for the various provinces of his empire, (for\nmany of these laws contained moral injunctions,) or that at Rome the\nPope placed the Imperial crown upon his head. But the Christian spirit\nof his government is evinced by that lofty idea which filled up the\nwhole of his active life--by his conception of the relations of church\nand state, and of the utility of science for the civilization of\nnations--by his project of an universal empire destined to embrace and\nprotect all civilized nations--the noble fabric of modern Christendom,\nof which he laid the first foundation-stone, and which reveals his\nenlarged views, comprehending alike his own age and succeeding times.\n\nBut whenever we meet in history with a government which independently\nof outward forms, is founded on the love of divine justice--on a\nprinciple of self-devotion whereby rulers are ready to sacrifice their\nown interest and even their own existence in the cause of justice and\nof social order--these, we may be sure are the certain and indubitable\nmarks of the realization of the Christian theory of law and\ngovernment. On the other hand, wherever we perceive despotism or\nviolence, or what we feel to be absolute wrong, though they be veiled\nunder the sanction of spiritual or temporal power, then we may be sure\nthe whole enterprise is unchristian, as the principle is unchristian.\nOf all the different forms of this political disease, of the manifold\nkinds of tyranny, whether ecclesiastical or secular, military or\ncommercial, domestic or municipal, academic or aristocratic, the\ndespotism of popular licentiousness is the most reprehensible in\nprinciple, and the most destructive in its effects.\n\nWith the usages and institutions of the Germanic nations, this\npeculiar temper of the Christian religion perfectly harmonized;\nincomparably better at least, than with the arbitrary government of\nthe Roman state, which even after the conversion of Constantine, still\nretained in all essential points a Pagan character. In the old German\nstates, the system of hereditary monarchy mostly prevailed;--but it\nwas quite alien from absolutism, and was intermixed with many\nRepublican institutions, laws, and customs. The whole system of those\ngovernments was founded on the historical basis of ancient usages--on\nthe pure, free and generous sentiment of honour--on personal glory and\npersonal character and talents. As soon as this natural moral energy\nof the Germanic nations had received a religious consecration from\nChristianity, and those energetic, heroic souls had imbibed with\nfervour, simplicity, and humility, the maxims of the religion of love;\nall the elements of a truly Christian government, and Christian system\nof policy were then offered to mankind. The political history of those\nancient times has been mostly represented in a too systematic point of\nview, for the purpose of favouring some particular object, or\ninterest, or some favourite opinion of modern times; since historians\nemploy all their ingenuity in tracing step by step, and disclosing to\nour view the first rise and gradual growth of any particular form of\ngovernment, or principle of right--such as the establishment of\nroyalty on the one hand, and that of the constitution of the three\norders on the other. But they remain quite unconcerned about every\nmore exalted principle in society. To judge and appreciate not\naccording to the standard of our own or any other age, but according\nto the dictates of eternal truth, the manners, the modes of thinking,\nthe tone of society, the spirit and views which animated men, whatever\nwas good or evil, christian or anti-christian in their sentiments, is\nwith these writers a matter of the utmost indifference. If there is\nany exception from the truth of this remark, it is when they meet with\nsome singular trait of manners or character--some historical paradox\ncalculated to stimulate interest, and which they then never fail to\nsever from its general connexion with the age, to tear up from its\nnatural roots, and exhibit to the curiosity of the beholder. And yet\nin such individual traits of character in the middle age, though they\nbe at first remarked only from their singularity, and be not even\nfully understood, more traces of historical life and truth are to be\nfound, than in those systematic representations of history, drawn up\nwith some specific political view, and which aim at an elaborate\ndissection and violent disrupture of institutions, which in those\nearly times, were inseparably united in the life of Christian nations.\nIf the best and most praiseworthy measures adopted in that first\nperiod of Christian polity, for the settlement and further improvement\nof the Christian state, and for the establishment and application of\nchristian maxims and principles of government, were nothing more but a\ngenerous effort, a good intention, a rude design--a feeble, imperfect\napproximation towards a divine term--yet we must consider them as\npeculiar historical phenomena, leave them in their individual\nbearings, and not prematurely force them into any systematic\nconnexion, or attach them to any fixed or formal principle of right;\nfor in the Christian government, feeling and personality are the most\nessential things.\n\nIf I could overstep the narrow limits of this work, confined as it is\nto a rapid sketch of the main and essential facts in the historical\nprogress of mankind, I should prefer to draw a portrait of the mode of\ngovernment and prevalent opinions of that age, out of the many\ncharacteristic traits in the lives of its distinguished rulers, its\ngreat and virtuous kings and emperors, knights and heroes:--such as\nthat Charlemagne, who would rightly open the series, that pious\nKing Alfred, who in a far more contracted sphere, was equally great,\nthose first Saxon Kings and Emperors of Germany--princes distinguished\nfor their religious and virtuous sentiments, their great and upright\ncharacter, and whose reigns exhibiting as they do, the paramount\ninfluence of religion on public life, constitute the happiest era, and\nthe truly golden period of our annals. The peculiar nature and\nconstitution, the internal spirit and essence of the Christian state,\nwould be much more clearly and vividly represented by the examples of\nthese great characters, who to the pure will of their energetic,\nheroic souls, united a practical knowledge of life, and a natural\ninsight into the principles of Christian policy. Such a course I would\nprefer to entangling myself in the usual disputes about the respective\nrelations of the spiritual and temporal powers, and all the\ncontentious points involved in that matter; or to entering upon any\ndissertation respecting the decisive era in the developement of\nroyalty and its rights, or in the progress of the constitution of the\nthree estates, and of various municipal corporations; however useful\nand instructive such enquiries may be in the special history of\nparticular countries. And even in the latter respect, those glorious\nnames form a mighty epoch; and in the history of almost all the great\nEuropean countries, we meet with some holy and magnanimous monarch,\nwho laid the solid foundations of his country's constitution, or\nintroduced a higher civility and refinement in life and manners. Such\nwere in Hungary the holy King Stephen, and in France, the great St.\nLewis, who in more unquiet times restored a better spirit, and for a\nwhile retarded the progress of corruption. There were also other\nkings, heroes and emperors, like Rodolph of Hapsburgh, who without\nbeing honoured with the title of saints, were truly pious, chivalric\nand equitable monarchs, and may be esteemed and revered as the\nChristian regenerators of their age, and the founders of a true and\nreligious system of government and manners. A lively sketch of such\nmen and rulers, who acted and governed well and greatly according to\nChristian principles and views, would, I think, furnish a far more\ncomplete idea of the true nature of the Christian state in this its\nfirst period of developement, than any laboured or artificial\ndefinition. There are along with these individual characters,\nindividual and transient periods of prosperity, which break out for\none generation or more in the history of those early times; periods\nwhich can only be considered as historical exceptions from the general\norder of things. Even those more comprehensive, and so far more\ngeneral political institutions, evidently peculiar to those Christian\nages, and nowhere else to be found--like the truce of God, which\nrepressed within certain limits the hereditary spirit of feud--or the\nspiritual chivalry in the orders of the Templars and of the Knights of\nSt. John, consecrated to warfare in the cause of God, and opening as\nthey did, in the time of the crusades, to the same spirit of\nchivalrous feud a higher path and a more noble career--all these\npolitical institutions, I say, springing out of the nature and\nexigencies of their age, can be understood only by a reference to the\ncircumstances and prevailing spirit of the times, and must therefore\nbe judged as historical peculiarities. As they often sprang up\nsuddenly without a visible or apparent cause, and as if by some high\nmysterious impulse, so they often sank again as rapidly; and the pure\nspirit--the true import of such institutions appeared but for a\nmoment, like a silvery gleam; then they degenerated, or were\ntransformed into something totally different. And we must not be\nastonished at this, since what is best and noblest in man--feeling and\nits divine quality, is most easily and rapidly impaired, and may\nsometimes indeed preserve an external vigour, when it has undergone an\ninternal change, and assumed a direction opposed to God and all\ngoodness. There were also particular rulers possessed of an energetic\nwill and a comprehensive understanding, who exercised a wide and\ncommanding, but pernicious influence on their age, and the world; and\namong these, the most noted were Barbarossa and that secret friend of\nthe Saracens, the emperor Frederick the Second; princes who with some\nothers, must be regarded as the first authors of the great dissension.\nAfter this dissension had broken out in the fearful struggle of the\nGuelphs and Ghibellines, and Christendom was divided into two parties;\ndiscord became general, pursued its resistless course, and acting in\nthose distracted times like some new destroying law of nature,\nabsorbed all personality and its influence in the general abyss of\nerror, or made it at least less conspicuous.\n\nI will now endeavour to give a short sketch of the general progress of\nEuropean society in this its first period of developement, and to\npoint out the then peculiar nature and constitution of the\nChristian state;--from that epoch when Charlemagne laid the first\nsolid foundation for a permanent system of christian government and\nchristian manners, down to the moment when an anti-christian spirit of\ndiscord broke out with incurable violence, and became universally\npredominant. I will at the same time endeavour to take an historical\nsurvey of the whole Christian West, as it has remained the theatre of\nthe subsequent progress of society, and of the great transactions of\nthe world down to our times.\n\nIn the blame so commonly lavished, (and not unreasonably, when we\nconsider the historical consequences,) on the customary divisions in\nthe Frankish or Carlovingian Empire, and the other German states, men\nforget that according to the old Germanic idea, a kingdom was nothing\nmore than any other great family estate, or princely inheritance, and\ngoverned, like these, by the same law of descent. This was so from the\nearliest times among both the principal races of the Germans. In this\nmanner we find the nation of the Goths divided into two kingdoms; and\nas the Saxons were with difficulty united under one head in their own\nancestral country on the Northern coast of Germany; so in the England\nwhich they had conquered and newly peopled, we find seven\nprincipalities or petty kingdoms of Anglo-Saxons co-existent with one\nanother; and these were only by accident reduced to a less number, and\nbut for a time blended into one sovereignty. We often ascribe to the\nmen, and to the spirit of those times, pretensions quite\ninappropriate, inapplicable, and perfectly modern. So possessed are we\nwith the notion of our times as to the natural and eternal boundaries\nof this or that country, of the predestination of a people to\npolitical unity, or of the necessary national unity of every\nstate--notions or prejudices which are held as so many mathematical\naxioms, in which we make the highest idea of policy to consist, to\nwhich we ascribe an inviolable sanctity, and which in our reverence,\nand in some cases, we might almost say--idolatry, we exalt above every\nthing else, and would make every thing else subservient to. To the\nsimplicity of those ancient times, the excellence and advantages of a\nmild, domestic, paternal, national sovereignty for the more convenient\nadministration of smaller states, appeared great, and superior to\nevery other consideration. Thus those who had to decide of themselves,\nand without the imperious call of duty--without the feeling of a\nstrong necessity for undertaking, even at the sacrifice of a part at\nleast of their own national welfare, the heavy burden of the imperial\noffice, in that Christian empire evidently established by divine\nProvidence for the protection of the church, and all the nations\nbelonging to it;--without this strong feeling of duty, I say, they\nnever would have deviated from the good old simple usage of dividing\nthe royal patrimony. The more so indeed as the glory they sought was\nrather of a chivalrous kind, consequently purely personal; and that\nfavourite idol of modern times--national vanity, was perfectly unknown\nto them. Their institution, certainly, would not be adapted to our\ntimes; nor was it even suited to those immediately succeeding; but an\nage to be judged aright and duly appreciated, must be estimated by its\nown standard, and the opinions proper to it. That even a division of\nsovereignty and partition of kingdoms is not incompatible with the\nexternal union of the body politic for one general design, so long as\nthe potentates are animated by a Christian and brotherly feeling, and\na spirit of union as to this one object--the all-uniting bond of\nconfederacy; is a truth which may be proved by many pleasing and\nglorious examples from the history of the earlier middle age, and from\nthat of Germany especially. If on the one hand we would lay it down as\na general historical law, and axiom of state, that separated or\ndivided kingdoms and countries can never combine for one common\nobject, nor remain permanently united in feeling nor Christian\nequity--so on the other hand, we must remember that the division of\nnations according to certain natural boundaries, which we would fain\nregard as the only perfect and absolutely right one, is like the\nquadrature of the circle, a problem eluding all calculation, and\nremaining for ever insoluble, since each one, according to his\npeculiar political position, or national prejudices, views those\neternal boundaries in a different light, and determines them\ndifferently. Thus in order to put an end to all discord and to the\ninjurious system of partition, nothing would remain but the vulgar\nresource of an universal monarchy and military dominion--a resource\nwhich as often as it has been tried, has been as little justified or\nrecommended by its historical results, as that custom of partition\nwhich prevailed in the German ancestral kingdoms of the earlier middle\nage.\n\nThe dangers of a bitter family feud, or of the mutual jealousies of\nthe heirs to the several kingdoms as to their respective portions,\nwhen these grew to any considerable extent, were early enough\nperceived. It is to be observed that in the first division of the\ngreat Carlovingian empire into three parts, designed by Charlemagne\nhimself, but accomplished only under his feebler successor; the\ninheritance assigned to the eldest and imperial brother--Lothaire, was\ntogether with Rome and Italy, the Rhenish district situate between\nFrance on the one side, and the interior of Germany on the other, and\nextending from Switzerland to the sea--a district where the Romans had\nplanted many and most flourishing colonies, and which for many ages\nback had been far superior in civilization and refinement to the\ncountries on either side. With the same prospective care, Charlemagne\nhad already fixed his residence at Aix-la-Chapelle, preferring the\nRhenish province as the then true seat of civilization. But in the\nfamily quarrel and dissensions which ensued, this measure of\nCharlemagne as far as it was intended, had no other permanent effect\nthan to cause amid the partitions of countries and changes of dynasty,\nthe continuance down to very modern times, of Lorraine as an\nindependent kingdom or dutchy. The Rhenish district long preserved its\npre-eminence in refinement above the rest of Germany; and with some\nexternal changes, was long the seat of empire.\n\nIn that dark old world of the North, on which Christianity was just\nbeginning to dawn, no monarch after Charlemagne, shone so\nconspicuously as the virtuous Alfred, King of the West Saxons in\nEngland. And the same remark is applicable not only to him, but to\nEngland in general, which during this first Christian period of modern\nhistory, far outshone all other countries in literature and science,\nas well as in religion, piety, and virtue. The great Pope, St.\nGregory, as I have already mentioned, laid the foundations of\nChristianity and intellectual refinement in England, whither he sent\nforty Missionaries; and so active was their zeal and efficacious\ntheir influence, that in the succeeding age, this first school of\nChristianity in England sent forth to other countries the most eminent\nmen of their time. Such were the German apostle and bishop, St.\nBoniface, and Alcuin, the learned friend and confidant of Charlemagne.\nBesides many Latin writers produced by this yet flourishing English\nschool, the great Christian Philosopher Scotus Erigena, lived in\nEngland in the time of Alfred; and though this philosopher was perhaps\nnot quite free from speculative error, he was far superior to his own\nage, and in the depth and originality of his conceptions, was not\nequalled, and certainly not surpassed for many succeeding centuries.\nKing Alfred, who though a bard and a writer in his own native speech,\nprized equally the Latin literature, and who defended his country\nagainst the Danes with the most perseverant valour, was the first\nfounder of the English constitution; for with the wisdom and pacific\nspirit of a lawgiver, he restored the old Saxon rights and privileges,\nand the regulations relating to the cities and the different orders of\nthe state. It was his virtuous courage, which in the most trying\nadversity, ever remained cool and collected, that alone rescued the\nisle of freedom from the fierce, impetuous power of the Danes.\n\nThe successful naval expeditions of the Normans to all the coasts of\nEurope, as far as Sicily and even beyond it, and the incursion of the\nMagiars into Europe, where they received the name of Hungarians, form\nin the ninth century the close, and are, as it were, the last\nreverberation, of the great immigration of the Northern nations, and\nmust on that account not be entirely passed over in silence. This last\nmaritime migration from the North began with a powerful and\nenterprizing ruler of Norway, the fair-haired Harold; and these naval\nexpeditions which were undertaken, not merely from motives of vulgar\npiracy, or of martial adventure, but for the foundation and permanent\nsettlement of new states, soon scoured all the coasts and regions of\nthe Northern ocean, as well as of the Mediterranean sea. The province\nin France which these freebooters conquered, the French acknowledged\nby the title of duchy of Normandy; and they were glad enough thus to\nbind it to their king by the homage of fealty, and to attach it to, if\nnot to incorporate it with, their kingdom. Called to Naples and Sicily\nby the Greeks, who demanded their aid against the Saracens, the\nNormans there founded for themselves a kingdom of long duration. After\nChristianity had introduced into Denmark a better system of government\nand legislation, the powerful Danish monarch, Canute the Great, ruled\nover England during this period of the Norman sway; till at last,\nafter a short interval of contest, another Norman, William the\nConqueror, issuing from France, founded a new dynasty in England, and\nestablished on the basis of the old free Saxon constitution, a high\nchivalrous aristocracy.\n\nFrom the remotest part of Eastern Asia, situate between the Uzi and\nthe Patzinacites, an emigration of nations took a Westward course\ntowards the country of the Chazars, and at last led the nation of the\nMagiars from their original seat to Pannonia, where, according to the\ntestimony of contemporary writers, the Avars, the descendants of the\nancient Huns, still lived under their Chagan. Once excited into\ntumultuous activity, these Hungarians (who were still Pagans) roved as\nfar as the North of Italy, and down to Thessalonica in Greece, and to\nthe very neighbourhood of Constantinople; they then advanced westward\nin large squadrons far into the interior of Germany, even to Saxony.\nIt was here that the noble King Henry the First, opposed a vigorous\nresistance to their incursions, and Otho the Great put a final term to\nthe progress of their arms by the victory on the banks of the Lech.\nChristianity, which was introduced into Hungary under Geisa, the\nfather of King Stephen, established a milder system of manners and of\nlegislation; a system which St. Stephen by a close union with Germany,\nbrought to full maturity. At the same period, Poland under the happy\ninfluence of the Christian religion, which introduced here a better\nsystem of manners and legislation, was incorporated into the civilized\ncommunity of the European nations, and with Germany in particular,\nformed a very close political connexion. It is particularly pleasing\nto observe the very beneficial influence of Christianity in the\npromotion of agriculture, and in the advancement of intellectual\nrefinement in the Northern vallies of Sweden, during the reigns of\nOlaus and St. Eric; when the old Hall of Odin at Upsal was finally\ndestroyed, and the new religion obtained the victory.\n\nDuring the period of the Norman glory, the Russians (a populous and\nwidely spread Sclavonian nation, inhabiting the vast and ancient\nSarmatia, formerly governed by the Goths) called to their assistance\nthe Varangians, who established a new dynasty at Novogorod. Either\nfrom this circumstance, or from the former dominion of the Goths, the\ncountry was by the neighbouring Finnish tribes afterwards called\nGothland. Russia received Christianity at the hands of the\nByzantines--and thus in its remote North, remained a stranger to the\nCatholic West--the more so, indeed, as the country, invaded and\ndesolated by the Moguls, long groaned under the oppressive yoke of\nthese barbarians--till at length, in very recent times, and in the\nvery struggle of regeneration, it has grown up into a mighty power.\nThus the whole circuit of the Christian West, and all the kingdoms it\nincluded, was now tolerably well filled up; and it then consisted of\nten principal countries or nations; but in forming this estimate we\nmust not attend to minuter subdivisions or mere national varieties,\nor to the frequent partitions of kingdoms, and alterations of\nterritory, amid various conflicting or successive dynasties; but we\nshould keep in view only the general and permanent outline of the\nEuropean states. Germany and Italy, which were respectively the seats\nof the Christian empire and the Papal dignity, formed the centre of\nEurope. Along with these two states, France and England were the most\nactive, the most powerful, and the most influential members of the\nEuropean commonwealth; while Spain was principally occupied with her\nown domestic contests against the Saracens. The Scandinavian countries\nwere somewhat connected with the Germanic Empire, and Poland and\nHungary, after they had embraced Christianity, were united with that\nempire in the closest bonds. Lastly, in the far Northern and Eastern\nextremities of Europe, the Byzantine Empire and the kingdom of the\nMuscovites, (closely connected by the ties of religion,) formed the\nextreme and remotest members of the Christian Republic. Such was the\ngeographical extent, and such the historical situation of Christendom\nat that period.\n\nAfter the downfal of the Carlovingian family, the empire was restored\nto its pristine vigour by the election of the noble Conrad, Duke of\nthe Franconians. This pious, chivalrous, wise and valiant monarch had\nto contend with many difficulties, and fortune did not always smile\nupon his efforts. But he terminated his royal career with a deed,\nwhich alone exalts him far above other celebrated conquerors and\nrulers, and was attended with more important consequences to\nafter-times, than have resulted from many brilliant reigns; and this\nsingle deed, which forms the brightest jewel in the crown of glory\nthat adorns those ages, so clearly reveals the true nature of\nChristian principles of government, and the Christian idea of\npolitical power, that I may be permitted to notice it briefly. When he\nfelt his end approaching, and perceived that of the four principal\nGerman nations, the Saxons alone by their superior power, were capable\nof bringing to a successful issue the mighty struggle in which all\nEurope was at that critical period involved, he bade his brother carry\nto Henry Duke of Saxony, hitherto the rival of his house, and who was\nas magnanimous as fortunate, the holy lance and consecrated sword of\nthe ancient kings, with all the other imperial insignia. He thus\npointed him out as the successor of his own choice, and in his regard\nfor the general weal, and in his anxiety to maintain a great pacific\npower capable of defending the common interests of Christendom, he\ndisregarded the suggestions of national vanity, and sacrificed even\nthe glory of his own house. So wise and judicious, as well as heroic a\nsacrifice of all selfish glory, for what the interests of society, and\nthe necessities of the times evidently demand, is that principle which\nforms the very foundation, and constitutes the true spirit of all\nChristian government. And by this very deed Conrad became after\nCharlemagne, the second restorer of the Western Empire, and the real\nfounder of the German nation; for it was this noble resolve of his\ngreat soul which alone saved the Germanic body from a complete\ndismemberment. The event fully justified his choice. The new King\nHenry, victorious on every side, laboured to build a great number of\ncities, to restore the reign of peace and justice, and to maintain the\npurity of Christian manners and Christian institutions; and\nprepared for his mightier son, the great Otho, the Restoration of the\nChristian Empire in Italy, whither the latter was loudly and\nunanimously called. This first age of the Saxon Emperors was the happy\nperiod wherein Germany possessed the greatest power and resources, and\nenjoyed great internal peace and prosperity. It is in this period,\ntoo, that we trace the first beginnings of mental refinement, in many\nexcellent and remarkable productions of the Latin school, which were\nsoon succeeded by the successful cultivation of the vernacular tongue.\nQuite as unhistorical, and even still more absurd than the reproaches\nurged against the Carlovingians for their impolitic partition of the\nEmpire, are those repeated lamentations and eternal regrets in which\nmodern historians indulge, whenever they have occasion to notice the\nfrequent expeditions of the German Kings and Emperors to Rome and\nItaly, and the connection which subsisted between the German nation\nand the Christian Imperial Dignity--a connection which these writers\nconsider a great misfortune. They do not enter into the true idea of\nthis dignity--they do not comprehend the urgent need of those times\nfor an universal Protectorate, which might, like a bulwark, defend\nEurope against internal anarchy, and the invasions of barbarous\nnations; and which might prevent the light of Christianity from being\nperhaps extinguished in a second night of universal barbarism. The\nmodern critics of those ancient times cannot understand that high\nChristian feeling--that exalted principle of self-devotion, whereby a\nnation from its internal strength and natural situation, was called by\nthe general voice to take on itself this burden for the common weal,\nand to be the firm sustaining centre of the European system--a calling\nwhich must necessarily occasion a mighty loss and heavy sacrifice of\nrepose and prosperity to the nation so undertaking the momentous\ncharge. Without this firm central power, which held together the\nEuropean nations, they would, yielding at the first shock, have\nsuccumbed under the attacks of the Mahometans or Moguls.\n\nWithout this central power, Europe would have been broken up into a\nmultitude of petty states, and have sunk into eternal and irremediable\nanarchy; whereas now, great as might be at times the confusion, and\nfearfully wild the spirit of warfare, there was always a resource and\na remedy against such calamities. As the religious vow of the knight\ndignified his duties into a sort of ecclesiastical warfare; so the\nhigh functions of the Emperor were considered as partly\necclesiastical, and he was looked on as the sworn liegeman of Almighty\nGod, intrusted with the high sword of universal justice. It was the\nexalted idea of this arduous and momentous charge, far more than\nschemes of selfish ambition and idle glory, that filled up the lives\nof the most active and powerful of those ancient emperors. Hence this\ncommon regard for the general welfare of Christendom, which the\nobligations of their respective stations imposed upon them, produced a\nvery intimate union between the heads of the spiritual and temporal\nauthority in Europe, and placed them in a state of mutual dependance.\nWhen the mighty emperor, Otho the Great, had been called into Italy,\nand had witnessed with his own eyes the state of general corruption\nand degeneracy at Rome, where among the baronial factions which\nsurrounded the Papal chair, one of the more powerful families sought\nby the most culpable intrigues to obtain a lasting, and as it were,\nhereditary possession of the holy see; he exerted his imperial\nauthority, and deposed the Pope, who by means so unlawful had obtained\nhis dignity, and on whom the general voice of the age had long\npronounced a sentence of condemnation, causing a worthier Pontiff to\nbe elected in his room. There still existed among those of the same\nmind in Christendom, an unerring feeling, whereby the righteousness or\nunrighteousness of any action, its real spirit and purpose, were\neasily and promptly determined without any anxious regard to mere\noutward forms. But when that uniformity of feeling had disappeared,\nand with it feeling itself had ceased to be a ruling principle of\npublic and political life, the standard of political estimation rested\nalmost exclusively on outward forms, and the contentious point of law\ninvolved in those forms; and as in every historical fact men saw but a\nprecedent fertile of application, or even dangerous in its\nconsequences, they no longer formed a pure historical judgment on the\ngeneral spirit of any great action, and they almost lost the very\nnotion of such a thing. The whole world at that time was unanimous in\njustifying the conduct of the great Otho in that affair. When however\nthe clergy of Rome, in their first feelings of gratitude and\nadmiration at their deliverance from intolerable anarchy, and the\ntoils of an unworthy family, conferred on the emperor the future and\npermanent power of choosing the Pope, it might have been easily\nforeseen that so extended a prerogative, little compatible as it was\nwith the independence of the church, would in the sequel provoke a\nstrong reaction. This accordingly took place about a hundred years\nlater, when a man of great energy of character, Pope Gregory VII.\narose to reform the church, and achieve its independence against the\nmany unlawful encroachments of the secular power. And when a prince,\ndistinguished indeed for his warlike qualities, but utterly\ncharacterless and animated with an unquiet spirit, who, according to\nthe unanimous testimony of his contemporaries, had incurred many and\nmost serious charges; when this prince first attacked and deposed the\nPope, and the latter laid him under an excommunication, the conduct of\nthe Pontiff was not only in strict accordance with the general opinion\nof the age as to the mischievous rule of this secular potentate; but\nwas quite conformable to the then prevailing doctrine of public law,\nwhich sanctioned the responsibility and accountability of the temporal\npower. Hence, Henry IV. found it more expedient to loose himself from\nthis excommunication by a feint submission, than to impugn it by open\nforce; although he never afterwards ceased persecuting the Pope, whose\nconstancy was proved in adversity and persecution. In our own times,\njustice has been at last rendered to the great qualities of this\nPontiff, and it has been allowed he was perfectly free from all\nselfish views, and that the austere and decisive energy of his\ncharacter sprang from no other motive than a burning zeal for the\nreform of the church and of mankind. The German historians in\nparticular, and in truth those on the Protestant side, have been the\nfirst to perform this act of justice; and the name of Gregory VII. who\nlived in times so different from our own, has long ceased to be with\nthe Germans a watch-word for party strife.\n\nBut on the matter at issue, or rather on the opinion the world then\nentertained respecting it, it will be necessary to say a few words.\nThat the Sovereign is in no way responsible seems in modern times to\nbe considered an immutable axiom, or rather the first of all axioms in\nthe science of government; and whenever a monarch in the history of\nthe middle ages, however vicious he may be and however forgetful of\nhis dignity, meets with the treatment of the Emperor Henry IV.,\npolitical indignation is raised to the highest pitch. No one can have\nthe slightest intention of questioning the perfect justness of the\nabove state-axiom, under certain given circumstances. But, if the\nquestion be a parallel between the middle ages and modern times, we\nmay oppose to the scandal of the ecclesiastical excommunication\npronounced against this prince during the former period, the still\nmore fatal example which has occurred within the last three centuries,\nof the public execution of several monarchs, and of the assassination\nof many others. Thus, in this respect, the history of the middle age\nstands purer; and this warns us to decide with less precipitancy on\nthe superiority of our own standard of political morality, and on the\ngreater perfection of modern principles of state-policy.[6] According\nto the feeling of right, and the prevailing maxims of public law in\nthat age, a mutual controul and responsibility subsisted between\nchurch and state, and between the heads of either. In the most\nesteemed constitutions of modern states, there is also a mutual\ndependence and possible controul. Thus the prince may dissolve the\nparliament, or resist its enactments by his veto; and, on the\nother hand, the parliament, by withholding its sanction to the\nimposition of taxes, or refusing the grant of subsidies, may weaken\nthe sinews of government, and summon, not indeed the king, who seems\nto be regarded as a mere cipher, but the ministry to a most severe\nreckoning. The government loses all stay and support, when the\nOpposition obtains a permanent and decided majority. Whether this\nmutual dependence and controul in the modern theory of government be\nless dangerous than in the ancient system, is a question which it is\nnot so easy to decide. As all the institutions of the middle age had a\nreligious spirit and character, it cannot excite our surprise that\nthis opposition between the spiritual and temporal power, and this\nmutual dependence of the heads of church and state should have been\nfounded in religion, and in the religious character and purpose of the\nImperial, as well as of the Papal, dignity. It was only by the\nexcesses of passion and violence, by the exaggerated proceedings of\nboth the spiritual and temporal powers, as well as by unfortunate\naccidents and a human imperfection, by no means inherent in the nature\nof the thing itself, that the dispute between church and state grew to\nsuch a fearful magnitude, was so prolonged, and often became almost\nincurable. But how easily, even then, peace might be restored between\nthe spiritual and temporal powers by the wisdom, the prudence, the\ngood-will, and conciliatory temper of both, is proved by the peaceable\ntermination of the quarrel respecting investiture under the successor\nof Henry IV. In the sequel, indeed, the harsh, stern, inflexible\ncharacter of the Ghibelline Emperors, especially Barbarossa, again\nperplexed this question; when from the contest growing more and more\nviolent betwixt the Guelfs and Ghibellines, the political schism\nbecame wider and wider, and discord seemed to be again the mistress of\nthe world.\n\n     [6] In confirmation of what Schlegel asserts in the\n     text, I shall cite a few passages from some\n     distinguished Protestant Historians of Germany. To shew\n     my readers the enlarged, liberal and enlightened views\n     taken by the Protestant writers of that country on the\n     political influence of the Papacy in the middle age,\n     and on the services which at that momentous period the\n     hierarchy rendered to the cause of social order,\n     liberty and civilization, it were easy to transcribe\n     matter more than sufficient to fill a volume. Let a few\n     examples suffice.--\"The Northern nations,\" says the\n     celebrated historian of Switzerland, John Muller,\n     rushing in upon the most beautiful countries of Europe,\n     trampling under foot, or disturbing and convulsing all\n     social institutions, menaced the whole Western world\n     with a barbarism similar to that which, under the\n     Ottoman sceptre, has obliterated every thing good,\n     great and beautiful that ancient Greece and Asia had\n     produced. Yet the Bishops and other Dignitaries\n     (Versteher) of the church, strong in their authority,\n     contrived to impose a restraint on those giants of the\n     North who, as regards intelligence, were but children.\n     They would not have been more successful than the Greek\n     prelates, had they been subject to four different\n     Patriarchs. The Popes of Rome, (whose primitive history\n     is as obscure and defective as that of the ancient\n     Roman Republic, since we know little of the first\n     Popes, except that they devoted their lives for the\n     faith, as Decius had done for his country,) the Popes,\n     we say, employed their authority with the same address\n     which we admire in the ancient Senate, to render their\n     see independent, subject to its immediate action the\n     whole Western hierarchy, and establish its sway, far\n     beyond the boundaries of the ancient empire, on the\n     ruins of the Northern religions. Thus whoever refused\n     to honour the Christ, trembled before the Pope; and one\n     faith and one church were preserved in Europe, amid the\n     breaking up and subdivision of the newly-founded\n     kingdoms into a thousand petty principalities. We know\n     what Pope made Charlemagne the first Emperor; _but who\n     made the first Pope_? The Pope, they say, was only a\n     Bishop; yes, but at the same time, the _Holy Father_,\n     the _Sovereign Pontiff_, the great Caliph, (as he was\n     called by Ho-Albufreda, Prince of Hamath) of all the\n     kingdoms and principalities, of all the lordships and\n     cities of the West. It is he who controuled by the fear\n     of God the stormy youth of our modern states. At\n     present even, when his authority is no longer\n     formidable, he is still very puissant by the\n     benedictions which he showers; he is still an object of\n     veneration to innumerable hearts, honoured by the kings\n     who honour the nations, invested with a power, before\n     which in the long succession of ages, from the C\u00e6sars\n     to the House of Hapsburg, a host of nations and all\n     their great names have vanished.\n\n     \"We declaim against the Pope! as if it were such a\n     misfortune that there should exist an authority to\n     superintend the practice of Christian morality, and to\n     say to ambition and to despotism, Halt!--so far, and no\n     further! _Bisher, und nicht weiter_!\" So speaks the\n     illustrious John Muller. The celebrated Herder allows\n     \"that without the hierarchy, Europe in all probability\n     had become the prey of tyrants, the theatre of eternal\n     wars, or even a desert.\"\n\n     \"The hierarchy,\" says Beck, \"opposed the progress of\n     despotism in Europe, preserved the elements of\n     civilization, and upheld in the recollection of men\n     what is so easily effaced--the ties which bind earth to\n     Heaven. Those ignorant men, as we affect to call them,\n     have settled almost all the countries of Europe. The\n     fruits of that time are the formation of the third\n     estate, whence dates the true existence of nations--and\n     the establishment of cities, wherein social life and\n     true liberty were developed.\"--_Beck on the Middle\n     Age_, page 13. _Leipzick_, 1824.\n\n     \"The weak,\" says Ruhs, in his Manual of the History of\n     the Middle Age, \"then found in spiritual authority a\n     better protection against the encroachments of the\n     powerful than afterwards in the balance of power--a\n     system which, as it was _a thing purely abstract,\n     devoid of all external guarantee_, must soon have lost\n     all influence. The Pope was always present to terminate\n     the wars which had broken out among Christian princes,\n     and to protect the people against the injustice and\n     tyranny of their rulers. The Clergy therefore every\n     where showed themselves opposed to the power of kings,\n     when the latter wished to become perfectly\n     absolute--they wished not to domineer over them, but\n     confine them within the legitimate bounds of their\n     authority. The Priesthood was consequently always for\n     princes, when powerful vassals attacked the rights of\n     the Sovereign--they were the natural and constant\n     guardians of the rights and liberty of all\n     classes.\"--_Manual of the History of the Middle Age_.\n     1816.--_Trans._\n\n\n\n\n                        END OF LECTURE XIII.\n\n\n\n\n                            LECTURE XIV.\n\n\n  On the struggles of the Guelfs and Ghibellines.--Spirit of the\n    Ghibelline age.--Origin of romantic poetry and art.--Character\n    of the scholastic science and the old jurisprudence.--Anarchical\n    state of Western Europe.\n\n\nThe most rapid sketch of the history of the middle age, if it\ncontained but a few lively, characteristic and faithful traits on a\nsubject inexhaustible in itself, would suffice to convince any\nreasonable man that great characters, (abounding almost more than in\nany other period of history,) important interests, mighty motives, and\nlofty feelings and ideas were there in mutual collision; and that in\nwhat is called the anarchy of the middle age we find an active and\nstirring life, the most splendid feats of heroism, and many luminous\ntraces of a higher power. The most careful consideration and profound\ninvestigation of the history of those ages, invariably discovers that\nall that was then great and good in the state, as well as in the\nchurch, proceeded from Christianity, and from the wonderful efficacy\nof religious principles. Whatever was imperfect, defective, and\nhurtful, belonged not to that moral principle which animated society,\nand which was itself the best, the noblest, and the soundest; but was\nin the character of men, we might almost say, in the character of the\nage itself, which, though perhaps not originally and purposely\nselfish, had yet become so in the violence of the conflict. And by\nselfishness, I do not precisely understand a vulgar self-interest, or\nan ordinary ambition, but that absolute will or conduct which springs\nfrom some unalterable resolution, which, hurrying from one extreme to\nanother, is sure to produce a perpetual alternation of extreme\nmeasures. In some cases this conduct proceeded from a want of\npenetration, prudence, and steadiness, which did not always accompany\nthe deeds of heroic enthusiasm, the astonishing energy of will and\nstrength of character which distinguished the men of those ages. The\nprinciple then really bad, the principle hostile to good, must be\nascribed to that inclination to discord, innate in man, or which at\nleast has become his second nature--an inclination which, when united\nwith those other mighty qualities of the age, assumed indeed the most\nformidable shape.\n\nThe whole middle age, however, must not by any means be depicted as a\nperiod of universal anarchy; as, from the great difference of times,\nand the fact that much in the manners and political institutions of\nthose ages is now scarcely intelligible, modern writers are but too\napt to indulge in this strain of censure. Above all, we must be\ncareful to distinguish in the history of the middle ages the variety\nof epochs. As long as those religious principles on which church and\nstate depended, were maintained in their unity and intregrity, the\nsocial stability of that first and happier period is indeed\nremarkable, and forms a striking contrast with the succeeding age. For\nprivate feuds, restrained within certain bounds by the manners of\nchivalry and the laws of honour, or the more protracted, and\nfrequently renewed struggles of a warlike nation to repel the inroads\nof barbarians, or the aggressions of turbulent neighbours, are no\nadequate proofs of general anarchy. But a full knowledge and just\nappreciation of the power of principle, which during that better\nperiod was the Christian foundation of the state, is of so much more\nimportance to our age, as in these times when principle has given way\nto the mutable opinion of the moment, and the latter exerts so mighty\nan influence on public life; though men have the power to throw off\nthis ursurped dominion, they will not return to that unity and\nstabilty of principle, however strongly they may feel the necessity of\nrestoring its saving influence. No parallel could be more profitable\nand instructive than the comparison between an age and a state, where\nprinciple was predominant, and another where opinion was paramount.\n\nAll that was great and good in the history of the middle age, as I\nobserved at the commencement of this lecture, existed only in\nfragments, and this has very much contributed to heighten the\nappearance of anarchy throughout the whole of this great period of\nhuman history. Of this the blame must be sought for in a combination\nof many injurious causes, and in the resistance of many opposing\nelements. That wonderful power of regeneration, by which the whole of\nWestern Christendom, after every mighty destruction, and reign of\nconfusion in church and state, has, in a form somewhat modified,\nsprung up anew, renovated and exalted, can be ascribed only to that\nreligion which was in Christian countries the first, and for so many\ncenturies the apparently almost indestructible support of the social\nedifice. In many and memorable periods of regeneration, down to our\nown times, this truth has been repeatedly manifested; unless perhaps\nthis self-renovating power conspicuous in the progress of Christian\nEurope, as well as of the particular nations composing it, languishing\nand decaying by degrees, become at last utterly extinct.\n\nAmong the characteristic, remarkable, and peculiarly Christian\ninstitutions of the middle age, we ought especially to mention that\necclesiastical truce, or peace of God, which towards the commencement\nof the eleventh century, opposed a powerful barrier to the growing and\nrestless spirit of private warfare. Without its being possible to\nspecify exactly, how or where this institution first arose, it was at\nonce proclaimed in several places, and generally received with pious\nfaith, as a voice of reconciliation from above, an immediate\nrevelation and benign dispensation of divine Providence; and every\nweek the tolling of the bell announced the sacred truce from Wednesday\nevening to Monday morning, during which time all feuds were to\nsubside, and all hostilities to cease. It may indeed here be asked in\nthe spirit of modern times, why were only four, and not the whole\nseven days of the week fixed upon, for the cessation of disorder? and\nit may be further said that a severe criminal code, and a prompt,\nvigorous and enlightened administration of the law, would have\nrendered such expedients unnecessary. And it is thus that men speak\nand reason without any knowledge of that age; for many feuds,\ntroubles, and contests then existed, as in all ages have existed and\nstill exist, which no criminal legislation can reach: and who will not\ndeem it the part of prudence and a real gain, when peace is not\nattainable, to obtain at least a safe and honourable armistice, or to\nsubtract from the principle of war four sevenths of its baneful\ninfluence and actual duration? And how happy would men have accounted\nthemselves, if, in other and later times of disorder, when nought was\nreverenced or respected, and every thing sacred was an object of\nhatred and persecution, they could, amid the general confusion, have\nfound shelter under such a wall of safety, or been blessed with such a\nholiday of peace, though only at particular times of the week! We\nshould rather admire the power of religion, whereby such a prohibition\nwithout the aid of external force, or secular authority, and running\ndirectly counter to the ruling passion of the age, was received with\nsuch pious faith, and followed with such humble docility.\n\nIn the first crusade, religious feeling and enthusiasm was the great\nspring of action; and in the outset, at least, it was far more the\nglowing eloquence of Peter the hermit, his affecting description of\nthe Holy Land, and of the holy places groaning under the Saracen yoke,\nwhich contributed to bring about this memorable expedition, than the\npretended policy of the Popes for causing the depression of regal\npower, and the promotion of popular freedom. These mighty\nconsequences, though in fact historically true, became apparent only\nat a much later period, and so far from being pre-concerted, were then\nnot even foreseen. As the first Crusade occurred in the most brilliant\nperiod of Norman glory, the Norman heroes, especially those from\nFrance, took a very active and prominent part in it. The warfare which\nthe Saracens waged against Christendom was considered (and then\nperhaps not without reason,) as a state of permanent and universal\nhostility. The chivalrous and defensive wars of Christian nations\nagainst the unbelievers were looked upon in the same light; and if we\nmay judge from posterior events, Jerusalem and Egypt, in that long and\nmemorable contest between Europe and Asia, could very well be\nregarded, both in a military and political point of view, as the\nbulwarks of Christendom. Feats of prodigious, and almost incredible,\nheroism were achieved in the Holy Land; and, at the close of the\neleventh century, the victorious cross was planted in the holy city,\nand the pious Christian hero, Godfrey, proclaimed King of Jerusalem,\nthough this title, as suited only to the divine Son of David, he with\nall humility renounced.\n\nIn this holy city the first two spiritual orders of chivalry sprang\nup; the knights of St. John, who took up arms for the defence of\npilgrimage, and in their vows combined the care of the sick pilgrims\nwith the management of the sword; and the Templars, so called after\nthe temple of Solomon, and from a recollection of the remarkable\nsecrets connected with that edifice. Chivalrous institutions of this\nkind, wherein Christianity contrived to blend the most opposite\nqualities and inclinations of human nature, could not have sprung up\nunder a mathematical government of reason, or in a state where every\nthing is reduced to the level of a dead uniformity, and general\nequality, and where all feeling and personality are effaced. But the\nvoice of ages has decided completely in favour of these marvellous\ninstitutes, and even in our own times, amid all the changes and\nfluctuations of opinion, they have preserved the respect, and\nobtained the forbearance, of mankind.\n\nEven in the second Crusade which took place about fifty years later,\nwhen the new progress of the Saracen arms appeared to threaten the\nsafety of the holy city, it was far more the pious eloquence of St.\nBernard than any scheme or calculation of policy, which set the whole\nEuropean world in motion. The number of warriors and armed pilgrims\nwho, under the guidance of the Emperor Conrad, and the King of France,\npoured in upon the Holy Land, is computed at more than half a million.\nThe religious enthusiasm and chivalric heroism which formed the sole\nand animating principle of the whole enterprise, were not always\naccompanied with sufficient prudence, wisdom and circumspection. The\nwant of these qualities at least, as regarded the influences of\nclimate, the physical wants of so vast an army, and a geographical\nknowledge of localities, is too often apparent; and in default of this\nnecessary foresight and preparatory information, many thousands\nperished in the second as well as in the first Crusade; a fate which\nindeed is not unfrequent in wars, where great bodies of people are\nexposed to toil and hardship in a foreign climate. These expeditions\nwere indeed like new migrations of nations, which took an opposite\ndirection from the first, and rolled backward from Europe towards\nancient Asia. The great multitude of men engaged, would sufficiently\naccount for these memorable expeditions, as it proves the redundance\nof population in Europe, which sought on this occasion, and by means\nof this kind, to disburden itself of its surplus numbers. And if this\nnumerous population may have given rise to, or afforded materials for,\nturbulence and anarchy, still on the other hand, it furnishes a proof\nthat that anarchy was not of so destructive and depopulating a nature,\nas the descriptions of modern historians would sometimes lead us to\nsuppose.\n\nThe real point of transition in German history from good to\nevil,--from those Christian principles which were ever predominant in\nthe earlier period, to the unappeasable contests of the Guelfs and\nGhibellines in the later middle age, must be fixed in the reign of the\nEmperor Frederick the First. The hostile treatment of the old Saxon\nrace, the destruction of that first and greatest of the old national\ndutchies of the Germans, was occasioned by the jealousy of the East\nFranconians under the dynasty of that race; and this measure, begun\nduring the reign, (in every respect so mischievous) of Henry the\nFourth, who thus became chargeable with this mighty injustice towards\nthe whole German nation, was now brought to a head by the Emperor\nBarbarossa. And thus, with the most signal ingratitude, was cut off by\nthe root that noble stem whence German glory and German power had\nsprung; for the reigns of the great Saxon Emperors form precisely the\nmost prosperous and most brilliant period of German history, such\nindeed as has never been again witnessed. With the same unrelenting\nseverity and atrocious cruelty, this Ghibelline Emperor destroyed the\nconfederate cities of Lombardy, and with them crushed the fair plant\nof Italian civilization just then beginning to blossom.\n\nThese two great historical parties--the Guelfs and Ghibellines, are\nthe same which we meet with in other periods of history, and even in\nour own times, though under other names, often in a form very\ndifferent from that of the present day, and not always in the same\nrelative position towards each other; but in the middle age they\nappeared in the larger and more gigantic proportions of the vigorous,\nheroic character belonging to that epoch. There is ever the one party\naspiring after greater freedom, and the other immovably attached to\nthe ancient faith, and to the principles it inculcates. That the\nliberal principles of innovation should, according to the peculiar\ncomplexion which these opinions take in every age, have emanated even\nfrom imperial power, and should have sought to establish their\ndominion in the world by force of arms, is not improbable in itself;\nand examples of a like kind are not wanting in history. And in this\nshape we find these principles in the middle age, where for a long\nwhile they exerted the greatest influence, and at last became almost\npredominant. On the other hand the legitimate attachment to the old\npermanent principle of faith appeared here in the form of an\necclesiastical opposition to secular ascendancy. But in the time of\nBarbarossa, the solemn reconciliation which took place between this\nEmperor and the Pope, restored harmony between the heads of church and\nstate, and at last composed the long feud. This powerful Emperor,\naccompanied by the King of France, and the lion-hearted Richard,\nundertook a new crusade, in order to deliver Jerusalem which had been\nwrested from the Christians by Saladin; but before he could accomplish\nhis design, death terminated his active career.\n\nAlthough the last Ghibelline Emperor Frederick the Second, had been\neducated by Pope Innocent III., a Pontiff distinguished by his\nenlarged views, and great intellectual endowments, and who had\nundertaken the care and guardianship of the Emperor's childhood; yet\nthe old dispute broke out again under this monarch with more violence\nand more implacable animosity than ever. This quarrel was never more\nappeased, at least during the sway of Frederick II. and his family;\nand it terminated only with the downfal of the Hohenstaufen, the most\npowerful of all the princely houses of the middle age. Yet the\nGhibelline name, heretofore stamped in characters of blood upon the\nearth, subsisted a long while yet; and for ages after, the Ghibelline\nspirit continued to be the prevailing one in Europe. Although the\nlater Swabian Princes and Emperors of this house, such as Henry VI.\nand others, were the patrons of poetry, and of the Proven\u00e7al\nminstrels and German Minnesingers; yet they all resembled one another\nin an unbending sternness of character. Henry VI. perpetrated the most\nenormous cruelties at Naples; the blood-thirsty Ezzelin, while\nGovernor of Lombardy under Frederick the Second, has left behind him\nso fearful a recollection in Italy, such a character in the pages of\nhistory, that his very name need only be mentioned, and will dispense\nwith all minuter historical details. The last of this family,\nConradin, was an innocent victim of the public hatred borne to his\nancestors, and he perished on a scaffold at Naples by the hands of\nCharles of Anjou, the brother of St. Lewis, who had seized on the\nkingdom of the two Sicilies, the lawful patrimony of the royal youth.\nThe Emperor Frederick the Second--a prince who for his times had\nreceived a most polite education, and was endowed with the greatest\nand most original powers of mind,--was not only accused by the Pope in\nthe excommunication he pronounced against him of a secret but decided\nenmity to the Christian religion; but in the general opinion of the\nworld, laboured under the same suspicion. However, by a prudent peace,\nwhich this prince concluded with the Sultan of Egypt, he terminated\nhis crusade more successfully than his grandfather had done his own;\nfor by this he won back the holy places, and placed the crown of\nJerusalem on his head. He was the first who brought into Europe the\nArabic translation of Aristotle's works; and as at this period a\nmighty change took place in the science and philosophy of the middle\nage, and as even the art and poetry of European nations began to\ndisplay new life and energy, it may not be amiss to give here a rapid\nsketch of these important changes, as they serve to characterize the\ntimes.\n\nChivalry was in itself the poetry of life; what wonder then that that\nlife of imagination, should have opened a new fountain of poesy in the\ntraditional songs, the fairy lays, the varied minstrelsy, and knightly\nnarratives of Germany and France, Spain and England, since in these\ncountries, chivalry was the ruling element of society, and had made\nthe greatest progress?--For the more immediate object of this\nPhilosophy of History,--and in order to contemplate the progress of\nmankind in matters more serious and important, I have thought the\nmoral principles of men in the middle age, and their political\ndoctrines, as they were founded on religion, or on the system of\nopposition to religion, to be of far greater moment and importance\nthan the mere \u00e6sthetic part of those ages; for sentimentalists may\nindulge in a certain vague, superficial love and predilection for the\ntimes of chivalry, for the romantic spirit of the chivalrous life, and\nof the chivalrous poetry, and of the whole system of modern art which\nhas thence emanated; and nevertheless all the deeper problems of life\ninvolved in that momentous epoch may remain unexamined, unsolved, or\neven misunderstood.\n\nOn the nature of this romantic tendency, inasmuch as it exerted a\nmighty influence on life, and was a motive of vast and undoubted\nweight in many of the most important historical events of those ages,\nI shall merely say a word by way of psychological illustration; for\nthis is applicable to the prevailing forms of mind, the peculiar\nintellectual bearings of whole nations and ages, as to those of\nindividuals. As where opinion is the ruling principle of life--it is\nvery soon broken, divided, parcelled out and lost in a chaos of\nheterogeneous theories, and the age--the world--life itself are\ninvolved in interminable disputes; so when religious feeling\nconstitutes the primary principle of life; and it hath been\ndismembered, and torn from its right centre, been driven to some\nextreme; and opinions flowing from this source have been carried into\naction; then all the great transactions of public life exhibit that\noverruling influence of imagination, perceptible not in the earlier,\nbut in the later periods of the middle age, especially from the great\nepoch of the Crusades. Although these and other like great historical\nevents of that period bear many noble traces of the high religious\nsource whence they sprang; yet such a paramount influence of\nimagination over real life, must in this partial excess be regarded as\nthe consequence of the dismemberment of man's psychological powers--a\nsymptom of the dissolution of that internal harmony which can never\nsubsist in society, unless it be previously established in\nconsciousness. The radical vice of the middle age--that is to say, the\none most prevalent in its later period from the time of the\nGhibellines--if one may venture to characterize it with such\npsychological generality--is discernible in the productions of the\npoetry, art and science of that age. And the relations which these\nbore to society--the distinctive character--the peculiar spirit of\nthis critical period in the progress of Christian nations, are matters\nof the highest interest and greatest moment. This vice consisted in\nthat disposition to extremes--that leaning towards the absolute I have\nalready spoken of, as manifested in will, in determination, in\nrule--or in science, speculation, and poetry. The first germ, or at\nleast the first disposition to this fault, lies in the very origin of\nmodern nations, especially those five whose political existence sprang\nout of the union of the Germanic constitution, manners, and character,\nwith the Latin civilization, literature, and language in the Romanic\ncountries; or which at least were formed by a very strong infusion of\nthe Roman spirit--I mean the German and English, the French, Spanish,\nand Italian nations. Where the character of the German tribes, the\nfree, heroic energy of Germanic nature was blended and incorporated\nwith the strong worldly sense of the Romans by the influence of\nChristian principles and religious love; there sprang out of that\nhappy union those great and mild characters, to which I have already\ndrawn your attention, and which flourished during the first period of\nthe German Empire and of the middle age. But as soon as the influence\nof the Christian religion began to decline, and its power was\nenfeebled, clouded or obscured, the two elements, which had been\nunited in the human race, fell asunder; and on one side was to be seen\nnothing but mere Roman astuteness (as is often enough the case in the\nlater history of France and Italy); and on the side of the Germanic\nnations, nothing but a rude martial impetuosity and chivalric pride,\nuncontrolled and unsoftened by the principle of religion. Or when\nagain the rigid principles of that old worldly sense and instinct of\ndominion, which belonged to the Romans, were conjoined with the heroic\nenergy of the North, without however the healing and conciliatory\ninfluence of the religion of love; this combination, which is\nconspicuous in the vehement but fearful characters engaged in the\nGhibelline contests, was indeed the most unfortunate of all.\n\nHow the tendency towards the absolute--that abyss to mankind, which\nalong with love, confounds and swallows up all life--then hurried the\npolitical world from one extreme to another, we have already\nmentioned, so far as was necessary for our object.\n\nBut even in the art and poetry, as well as the science of the middle\nage, this leaning towards the absolute is equally apparent, and the\nmore so, as both reached their full maturity at that period only when\nthis had become the ruling spirit of the age. As, on one hand, the\nchivalrous poetry, especially in its origin, was excessively\nfantastical, until later it was fashioned into a form of milder\nsymmetry, and made to pour forth the touching, heart-felt tones of\nromantic art; so on the other hand the scholastic philosophy was\nbewildered in a maze of subtleties not so much metaphysical as merely\nlogical, and often quite destitute of sense. The singular manner,\nindeed, in which the Italian poet Dante, has in his mighty poem of\nvisions, wherein he displays the most masterly and classical\ncondensation of language, and the profoundest poetical art, contrived\nto sustain in his progress through the three regions of the invisible\nworld that fantastic spirit, (which was not confined to the chivalrous\npoetry, but was common to every department of imagination in that\nage,) next the stern maxims of the Ghibelline state-policy, and a\ncongenial worship of Roman antiquity, and has managed to unite all\nthese qualities with the subtle distinctions of the scholastic\nphilosophy; this singular manner, indeed, has never been an object of\ngeneral imitation, nor has it opened a path to the subsequent labours\nof art. But this work will ever remain an extraordinary, wonderful,\nand characteristic monument, wherein the peculiar spirit of this\nfirst scholastico-romantic epoch of European art and science is\ndisplayed in a most remarkable manner. In this spirit there were many\nheterogeneous elements, not confined to their separate and distinct\nspheres, but often in the strangest juxta-position, or rather\nconfusion. And thus a regular scholastic science of love, with all the\nborrowed forms of the philosophy of the day, formed often the purport\nof the most tender romantic lays or devices; and logical antitheses,\nsyllogisms, and subtleties were solved in rhyme and verse, with a most\ncharming play of fancy. It is these vagaries (and so they are in many\nrespects) which so captivate our feelings in the poetry of\nPetrarch--one of the restorers of ancient literature and of modern\nlearning.\n\nMore strongly still than in its poetry, the richness of an inventive\nimagination displayed itself in the wonderful architecture of the\nmiddle age, as so many splendid monuments in Germany, England, a part\nof France, and in the North of Italy and Venice can attest. The style\nof the Byzantine churches was the first and principal model of this\nGothic architecture; though a fantastic monument of Arabic\narchitecture may here and there perhaps have had some influence in its\nformation. The elaborate and ornate style, and the fantastic\nsingularity of this architecture, breathe the true spirit of the\nGerman middle age. At this time, painting, too, began to make some\nprogress in Italy and Germany; though its progress was incomparably\nslower than that of architecture, and the art reached its perfection\nonly in the fifteenth century; but devoted entirely to religious\nsubjects, and consecrated to the use of churches or private devotion,\npainting remained, down to the time of Raphael, an art peculiarly\nChristian, and displayed the profoundest import, and the most masterly\npower. From this period, renouncing, for the most part, the religious\ncharacter of the elder Christian painting, art began to be affected by\nthat enthusiasm for the Pagan antique, which indeed was not limited to\nthe fine arts, but was the prevailing character of literature and\nscience in this second period of European culture. And I have made\nthese few remarks, not so much for the sake of art itself, which would\nrequire a separate investigation, but as tending to elucidate the\nvarious epochs and stages in the progress of modern civilization.\n\nIt was an ill-boding gift that the Ghibelline Emperor made to Europe\nwhen he brought from the East the works of Aristotle, translated, or\nrather burlesqued, into Arabic, and thence turned again into Latin,\ntill at last they became often perfectly unintelligible. The elder\nChristian philosophers belonging to the first period of the middle\nage, such as in England (which still retained a high pre-eminence in\nLatin literature and Christian science,) a Scotus Erigena, the\ncontemporary of Alfred,--a St. Anselm, so highly revered in\ntheology,--and afterwards in France, an Abelard, and also a St.\nBernard, in whose eloquence there runs so pure a vein of piety--and so\ncharming a mysticism of feeling--all these elder Christian\nphilosophers, both in thought and language were incomparably clearer\nand more precise than the schoolmen of succeeding times, and were for\nthe most part entirely free from that interminable play of an idle\nlogic, and those empty metaphysical subtleties. The natural sciences\nwere then in too low and feeble a state to form any distinct branch of\nhuman inquiry; and this very circumstance contributed, as was then\nindeed perfectly natural, to knit closer the ties which connected\nphilosophy with theology. But independently of the peculiar\ncircumstances of those times, it is evident that Christian philosophy\ncan be founded on religion only, and not on any theory, wherein nature\noccupies the first and highest place--not on any doctrine, which\ncontains the germ of a Pagan worship of nature, renewed under a\nscientific form. As little can a Christian philosophy rest on the\nprinciple of Individualism--a reason which submits not humbly to God\nand his revelation, but which, all concentrated in itself, aspires to\nbe all-sufficing and all-creative. In either respect, the Stagyrite,\nwhen studied even in the original, and thoroughly understood, would\nhave been a guide very unsafe, very likely to mislead, as well in\nnatural philosophy as in the higher problems of Metaphysics. The best\nand most instructive of his writings, his ethical or political works,\ncould not even be understood by those scholastic admirers of the\nGrecian sage; for the profound allusions they contained to the customs\nand political history of Greece made the knowledge of these, and a\ncomplete investigation of the original sources of information,\nabsolutely necessary to their comprehension. Even his logical and\nrhetorical books derive their chief and liveliest interest from the\nfact that they were intended to remedy the dialectic malady of Grecian\nintellect, and to oppose the all-usurping influence of a false\nrhetoric among the Greeks. Lastly, to comprehend fully, rightly\nappreciate, and turn to advantage, as our times are enabled to do, the\nmost solid works of the profound ancient--those on mixed physics and\nnatural history, the schoolmen were entirely destitute of the\nnecessary aids and preparatory information.\n\nIf the Christian philosophers of the middle age, instead of adopting\nthe Aristotelian system, had built and improved on the philosophy of\nthose first great original thinkers of Christian Europe already\nmentioned, or on the philosophy of the primitive fathers, even those\nof the Latin church, for by them also the Platonic doctrines (the only\ndoctrines of antiquity at all reconcileable with a philosophy of\nrevelation,) had long been planted and naturalized on the Christian\nsoil;--if this had been the case, the edifice of Christian philosophy\nwould have been raised with far greater ease and rapidity, and been\nwrought into a much more beautiful structure. Or if even the Greek\noriginals had been deemed absolutely indispensable towards such an\nobject, it had been better that, instead of waiting till the\ndestruction of Constantinople, the powerful Emperors and Potentates,\nwho patronized art and science, had, during the short duration of the\nLatin Empire at Constantinople, brought away with them those\nphilological treasures, instead of the works of Aristotle so absurdly\ndisfigured in the Arabic, and in the still more unintelligible Latin\nversion. It was, on one hand, the inclination of the age to absolute\nmodes of thinking, to the art of logical tournaments, and on the\nother, a hope, secretly entertained, that by the pretended magical\npower of these logical devices, one might learn and obtain the mastery\nof many profound secrets of nature (which by the way should have been\nsought anywhere but in the real Aristotle); finally, the unquenchable\nthirst after a fruit of knowledge, deemed forbidden--it was all these\ncircumstances, which created now that universal and irresistible rage\nfor Aristotle, reputed as he was to contain the very essence of all\nliberal science and philosophy.\n\nThe whole foundation of the scholastic philosophy was thoroughly and\nessentially false; and it had the most prejudicial and injurious\ninfluence, not only on theology, but on the whole spirit and modes of\nthinking of this age. When however the evil appeared nearly incurable,\nand the false current of opinion was too strong to be resisted, a\nmighty service was rendered to mankind, when acute and sagacious\ntheologians, endowed with philosophical talents and discernment, like\na St. Thomas Aquinas, adopting the common, but erroneous, basis of\nthis old Aristotelian rationalism, founded on it a system in which\nthey attempted to reconcile this philosophy with the dictates of\nfaith, and thus, in this respect at least, avert from their age the\ndangerous consequences of this false direction of the human mind. Yet,\non the whole, this was but an apparent reconciliation; and the\nscholastic philosophy, or in other words, the rationalism of the\nmiddle age, broke out often afterwards into a haughty and violent\nopposition to the doctrines of revelation.\n\nThis scholastic spirit of the now degenerate middle age exerted its\npernicious influence on life itself, and on the sciences more\nimmediately connected with life, particularly jurisprudence. For when\nthe first Ghibelline Frederick, on the plains of Roncaglia, gave his\nsolemn sanction to the Roman law, and to all those absolute rights and\nprerogatives of the crown which were thence to be deduced, he thereby\nopened a door to an intricate scholastic jurisprudence, to all the\nlearned subtlety of processes, and the interminable logic of law; and\nconferred on mankind a boon as little propitious as the Arabic\nAristotle, which his descendant, the second Frederick, afterwards\nbrought into Europe. The vast pandects of Justinian were already the\nrecognized code of laws, under the Eastern Franconian Emperors, long\nbefore the German Jurist Irnerius opened his school of civil law in\nthe University of Bologna. Those old Roman Formulas of universal\ndominion which are occasionally to be found in the Corpus Juris,\nsuited perfectly the spirit and policy of the Ghibelline Emperors,\nwho, in particular cases, alleged them against the Greek Emperors and\nother Potentates, as clear proofs of the universal monarchy which\nappertained to them. But it was particularly from the Ghibelline\nperiod that the Roman law became a favourite science, and its study a\nnew mania among the European nations, especially on account of the\nleaning to absolute principles in that system of jurisprudence, whose\nartificial forms of rigid law were indeed little congenial to the\nspirit of Christianity, to modern society, and German manners.\n\nThe true problem for the legal science of Christian Europe to solve\nwould have been this--to adopt the forms of the old Roman\njurisprudence, so highly wrought and finished in its way, and to\nreform its spirit by the doctrines and principles of Christian\njustice; and at the same time to employ the many excellent materials\nto be found in the native laws of European nations, and in all the old\nGermanic codes. These laws were indeed of a very local nature, adapted\nmostly to infant communities and the simple manners of warlike tribes,\nand by no means appropriate to a more advanced stage of civilization;\nyet they contained the solid substance of genuine freedom and exalted\nequity. But this task ought to have been accomplished in that earlier\nperiod when Christianity, which had united and harmonized so many\ndiscordant elements, had still retained all its influence--an\ninfluence which was afterwards wanting. Those ages, however, which\nwere so thoroughly Christian, and on that very account of such\npolitical importance, were deficient in science; and hence, as I have\nalready observed, it was not so much deliberate selfishness, or\nhostile opposition, but the real want of knowledge and foresight which\noccasioned the civil and political institutions of Christian states to\nbe left imperfect. It is only in very recent times that an attempt has\nbeen made to solve the problem which earlier ages had left unexecuted,\nor to supply this old deficiency of a Christian system of\njurisprudence. And if hitherto this task has never been adequately, or\ncompletely, accomplished, though all the conditions have long existed\nfor the solution of this necessary problem of European society; it\nwould not be right to defer again the execution of the work, and thus\nlose once more the seasonable moment.\n\nHow, after the struggle of parties had become more general, and an\nabsolute mode of thinking the ruling character of the age, the violent\ncontests between church and state, between the Secular and\nEcclesiastical authorities tended to promote their mutual injury and\ndestruction, I shall now endeavour briefly to state. After the last\nexcommunication pronounced against Frederick II., one anti-emperor had\nfollowed another in succession; and German princes, a prince of the\nroyal household of England, and a king of Castile, had filled\nsuccessively the imperial throne; none were generally and legally\nrecognized, and it was the reign of universal anarchy and savage\nclub-law. It was a dark interregnum in social order, as if the sun of\njustice and of peace had withdrawn its light from a world of\ncorruption and irreconcilable hate; and for a whole generation this\nstate of wild disorder, and fear of still greater calamities, lasted.\nThe loss of Jerusalem and all the Holy Land to the Christians, which\nnow took place, added to the general gloom of the times.\n\nIn vain had St. Lewis in his last Crusade against Egypt, once more\nexerted all his energies for the deliverance and preservation of the\nChristian possessions in the East; possessions, which had they been\nretained, might in the end have formed a rampart and a barrier against\nthe inroads of the Mussulman power into the adjoining provinces of\nEurope. Still the danger from this quarter was not so imminent; for it\nwas not till a hundred years later that the Turks burst from Asia\nMinor into Europe, conquered the Northern provinces of the Byzantine\nEmpire, and began to menace the Christian kingdoms of the West. But\nthere was a nearer and mightier danger rolling on against Europe--the\nformidable power of the Moguls, which surprised it in this period of\nthe great interregnum. As if the hostile spirit of destruction had\nanticipated or known that the power of Christendom could be subverted\nonly by internal discord; an old sage or priest of the still Pagan\nMoguls, had, about a generation before, announced to the youth, who\nwas afterwards called Zingis Khan, (that is to say lord of the world,\nand who is known by this name in history,) that in a vision, he had\nseen the Great Spirit, seated on his flaming throne, judge the nations\nof the earth, and that, by his decision, the dominion of the world had\nbeen allotted to the young Khan of the Moguls. Filled with this\nspirit, Zingis traversed the world with his countless hosts; conquered\nChina, Thibet and Japan, subdued the Mussulman Empire of Carizme, and\npenetrated as far as the Caspian Sea. The conqueror's four sons\ncontinued the work which he had commenced, and divided the earth into\nfour parts for their task of desolation. The one to whom was assigned\nthe Western portion of the earth invaded Christendom with his\ninnumerable squadrons; the throne of Rurick, the greatest Christian\npotentate in the North, was overturned; and for several centuries,\nRussia, incorporated with the government of Kipzak, groaned under the\noppressive yoke of the Mogul sway. Poland was overrun by the\nall-wasting hosts of Moguls; the King of Hungary was defeated, and\nforced to flee his country; Silesia was laid waste, and the bloody\ndiscomfiture of the Christian army at Lignitz filled the whole Western\nworld with consternation. Happily the destroyers penetrated no further\ninto Europe; and the stream of their conquests, as if diverted by a\nprotecting hand, took its course first towards the Arabian Caliphate\nof Bagdad, which they put an end to; and afterwards towards India, and\nother Asiatic and Mahometan countries. This was a passing, but awful,\nwarning to Christendom, how much she needed the strong arm of a\npowerful Protector, and that union alone would enable her to resist\nthe assaults and inroads of barbarous nations. It was the strong\nfeeling of such a necessity which had first inspired the idea of the\nWestern Empire.\n\nIn the German Empire order was first restored by Rodolph of Hapsburgh,\nwho, notwithstanding his earldom of Alsace and his other hereditary\ndemesnes in the Alps, had not yet so much power as many other\naspirants to the imperial crown; but his chivalrous virtues ranked him\nhigh in the estimation of many of the princes. A happy and singular\ncoincidence of accidental circumstances occasioned his unexpected\nelection to the empire, which appeared to him, as to many others, a\ncalling from above. Being on the most peaceful understanding with the\nPope, he yet abandoned his expedition to Rome; for he was, above all\nthings, anxious to put an end to anarchy, to establish the public\ntranquillity on a solid basis, and, as far as was then possible, to\nrestore the reign of justice. The high services which by this he\nrendered to his country in those distracted times, History has not\nbeen backward to acknowledge; and, as the Patriarch of the imperial\nhouse of Hapsburgh, he has been the founder of a power which, in\nsucceeding ages, has ever proved a pillar of strength and security to\nGermany and even Europe. But often again did anarchy rear her head,\nand often did disorder obtain the ascendant in Germany, as well as in\nother European states. Nations felt the want of one mighty,\nindependent, and protecting power--they lamented the decline of those\nChristian principles which had knit so closely all the ties of public\nand private life; and they saw with regret the gradual approach of the\ngeneral dissolution and mighty ruin of European society. Under\nRodolph's successors, down to Maximilian and Charles the Fifth, the\nEmperors were confined in their sphere of action to Germany and its\ninternal affairs, which do not here immediately concern us. The\nexpeditions to Rome tended, indeed, to keep alive the remembrance of\nthe old imperial rights and claims; but they were productive of no\npermanent advantage, nor real extension of power. It was only in the\nsummoning of general councils (the want of which was soon so urgently\nfelt for the well-being of the church and of Christendom), that the\nimperial power was really exerted in favour of the general interests\nof Europe.\n\nBut the evils which ensued to the church and its head, from its\nunhappy conflict with the temporal power, were far more extensive and\nfatal in their consequences. In the mighty contests between the Popes\nand Emperors, it was actual right which was the subject of dispute;\nand, in truth, the first basis and highest principle of all right in\nChristian states, and indeed in all human society; and however much of\nerror the exaggerations of later times may have infused into these\ndisputes, it was a sublime idea which animated either party. In\nFrance, which now took up that attitude of hostility towards the head\nof the church which the Emperors had once assumed, an entirely new era\nin European policy, which had now ceased to be Christian, commenced\nwith the reign of Philip-le-bel. In the place of those great motives\nand lofty ideas which animated a Gregory VII., on the one hand, and a\nConrad or Barbarossa, on the other, we meet with a vulgar policy, a\nselfish cupidity, and an unworthy cunning. In every point of view,\nPhilip the Fair may be considered as the worthy predecessor of Louis\nXI. Even his conduct towards the whole order of Templars, their\nexecution, or rather judicial murder, for the purpose of confiscation,\nwas a deed of violence which nothing could justify; even had the\nsuspicion entertained against the more corrupt portion of the order,\nof having introduced from the East certain unchristian tenets, rites\nand practices, been not entirely destitute of foundation. But yet this\nsuspicion did not affect the whole body, nor even the then worthy\ngrandmaster, as was shortly afterwards acknowledged by the King of\nPortugal and the Pope himself; and, in any case, an ecclesiastical\naffair of so much importance ought to have been investigated and\ndetermined by a mode of procedure very different from this arbitrary\nand despotic course.\n\nThe untimely exaggerations and absolute pretensions of Boniface VIII.,\nwhich, though Papal, may almost be termed _Ghibelline_ (in the\nsame sense that we have applied that term to the acts of preceding\nemperors), must have proved very welcome to Philip the Fair. He found\nin the conduct of the Pope, a pretext for enticing him into France, in\norder, on the first vacancy in the Holy See, to promote the election\nof a Pope favourable to his views, and fix him at Avignon. It was a\ndeep-laid plan of policy on his part, to fix the residence of the\nPopes for ever within his territories, in order more easily to extort\ntheir consent to all his selfish projects, as in the case of the\nTemplars; a policy by which the Popes, during seventy years, were kept\nin a state of absolute dependance on the court of France. And when at\nlast one of the Popes succeeded in rescuing the chair of Peter from\nthis Babylonish captivity, and placing it again at Rome, Popes were\nelected one against the other at Rome and Avignon; and a schism broke\nout in the church which lasted for forty years, till it was finally\nquelled by the general council of Constance. A deeper wound could not\nhave been inflicted on Christianity than this division in the church,\nwhich led minds astray, and introduced an indescribable confusion in\nall the relations of public and private life. As, without the\nall-protecting and all-connecting authority of the first Christian\nEmperors, Europe in general, and Germany in particular, would much\nsooner have been split and dismembered, and been deprived of all power\nof permanent resistance against foreign aggression, and barbarian\ninroads; so, without the Papal power, which was founded on, and\nadapted for, unity, and which held together the fabric of the church,\nChristianity would very soon have been lost and extinguished in a\nmultitude of particular sects, petty congregations, and opposite\nparties, even where totally dissimilar systems of religion did not\nspring up. The maintenance of orthodoxy in the Greek church, where the\nPatriarch does not possess the same spiritual power, nor the same\nextensive influence on society, as the Pope during the middle ages,\ncannot be fairly adduced as an objection to the truth of this\nobservation. For it would be absurd to expect from the active,\nstirring, restless, and animated spirit of the Western nations, moving\non as they did through a series of rapid, incessant, and progressive\nchanges, that innate monotony of thought even in faith, which was\nnatural to the dead, torpid Byzantine mind. When the Western church\nhad been weakened and convulsed by the conflict with the secular\npower, the prejudicial and fatal effects of this contest became\napparent in religion itself and the internal region of faith. At\nfirst, indeed, there arose a mighty moral power of resistance against\nthe growing corruption and the impending evil--a great spiritual\nremedy, which sprang out of religion, and was perfectly conformable to\nits spirit. It was here again apparent how that strengthening Spirit\nof aid and counsel--that Paraclete promised to the church by its\ndivine Founder, knows at every period, and on every new occurrence of\ndanger, to employ the remedies the best and most fitting for the\nexigences of the time; remedies of which the high origin is clearly\ndiscernible, though in the hands of men they no longer retain their\nprimitive character, and do not accomplish all the good they might\nhave effected, or even become at last more and more perverted.\n\nThe great wealth of the church was not the sole, but one of the\nprincipal subjects of dispute with the secular power, and was even a\nstumbling-block to many, especially among the people. It was this\nwealth, indeed, which had furnished the means of cultivating and\nfertilizing the soil of Europe, and sowing the seeds of science on\nthe soil of human intellect; for the existence of the clergy had been\nfounded on landed property, and by this means they had become\nnaturalized and domiciliated in the state, and among the nation; till\nthe splendid endowments which they received from the liberality of\nreligious zeal, made the abbots, bishops, and the whole of the higher\nclergy, wealthy lords, senators, and princes. This wealth and this\npower, the clergy, especially in the earlier times, generally employed\nin a manner the most praiseworthy, and the most conducive to the\nwelfare of the community. The annals of modern Europe, and the history\nof every great and petty state within it, are full of the high\npolitical services which the excellent churchmen of the middle age\nrendered to the public weal. This was universally acknowledged, and\nany sudden separation of the higher clergy from the state--any\ndegradation of that body from the exalted station which they occupied\ntherein, would have been a most serious loss to society. In the\ncontests of the emperors and other princes with the church and its\nhead, the immediate and original object of dispute was not\necclesiastical property, which no one ever dreamed of attacking; but\nthe jurisdiction over that property, and the acknowledgment of that\njurisdiction. It is easy to conceive that all the members of the\nhigher clergy had not rendered services equally eminent, and that the\nemployment of their riches had not been equally laudable and\nblameless. But, independently of individual abuses and scandals, the\ngreat wealth of the dignified clergy, the eminent and splendid rank\nthey occupied in the state and in society, were ever a stumbling-block\nto the people, and even to some ecclesiastics, and seemed in\ncontradiction with the original rule and evangelical poverty of the\nprimitive Christians. This was the first cause, the principal subject,\nand, as it were, the favourite text of that popular opposition which\nnow, after the example had been set by princes and potentates, began\nto unfurl its banners against the church.\n\nNothing therefore could be better adapted to the exigences of the age\nthan that, in opposition to the too great worldly pomp of many of the\nhigh though meritorious and virtuous dignitaries of that time,\ncommunities of men, animated by the sincerest piety, and the most\naustere spirit of humility and self-denial, should have arisen to make\nthemselves all in all to the people, and set the example of perfect\nevangelical poverty; or to devote their undivided zeal to popular\ninstruction and the office of preaching. Men of real sanctity, and the\nmost humble piety, and gifted with wonderful powers, entered on this\nnew path of religious zeal; and many amongst them, with a truly\nhigh-minded freedom, reprehended the abuses and the moral corruption\nthen existing in church and state, and among all orders of society.\nThey met with contradiction and opposition, and even at an early\nperiod incurred much blame; but here we must be careful to\ndistinguish human infirmity and partial degeneracy from the holy\norigin of those establishments--from that spark of divine inspiration\nwhich called these, and all other ecclesiastical institutes, into\nexistence. And thus that tide of popular opposition to the church,\nwhich had received its first impulse from the secular power, and the\ncontests of the Ghibelline Emperors, rolled on with an ever increasing\nforce, swell, and violence. Scarce had the Waldenses disappeared, when\na religious sect still more numerous, the Albigenses--broke out in the\nSouth of France, and not content with displaying the usual popular\nopposition to the riches and real abuses of the church, broached many\nerrors and doctrines of the Eastern sects, which during the Crusades\nmay have found their way into that country. For this reason it was\nthought justifiable to proclaim against them a formal Crusade, and, by\na most atrocious war of extermination, wherein the remedy appears no\nless reprehensible than the evil itself, princes put down this popular\nsect, which they regarded as rebellious not only against the church,\nbut the state itself.\n\nWickliffe in England was the first single bold Reformer that appeared,\nand he was succeeded soon afterwards by an Innovator, whose enterprise\nwas attended with far more important consequences--John Huss in\nBohemia. Their writings, abounding not only in the wonted condemnation\nof real abuses, but in many fanciful doctrines, unfounded assertions,\nand germs of heresy, their cause as well as the general state of\naffairs, and the problem of the age, became more complicated and\nperilous.\n\nJohn Huss was summoned before the council of Constance, which had\nterminated so successfully the schism in the Papacy; but there,\nwithout any regard to the imperial safe-conduct which he had received,\nhe was condemned, and delivered over to capital punishment. As one\ninjustice, one act of bloody severity, is sure to bring on another, a\nfew years afterwards the Senators of Prague were precipitated from a\nwindow. This was the signal for a general rising of the people; Ziska,\nat the head of his infuriated troops, ravaged Bohemia, burst into the\nneighbouring provinces of Germany, and, with a Hussite army of seventy\nthousand men spread terror every where on his march. This insurrection\nwas indeed suppressed, but Europe grew every day more and more ripe\nfor a Revolution.\n\nA new and pressing danger, which had been long foreseen, now\nthreatened Europe from an opposite quarter. The Turks, who for almost\na century had been in possession of the Northern provinces of the\nByzantine Empire, became now masters of Constantinople, and the old\nchurch of St. Sophia was converted into a Mosque. That portion of\nEurope which stood in most immediate danger,--Germany, Austria,\nHungary and Poland--was now compelled to make, for the space of more\nthan two centuries, resistance to the progress of the Turkish power\nthe object of its most assiduous attention; and this was a\ncircumstance which tended to impede the emperors in all their other\nenterprises, to divert their efforts, and consume their best energies,\nand so far, in the then existing embarrassments in church and state,\nexerted a very fatal influence on the whole system of European\nsociety.\n\nThe immediate effects of the siege and fall of Constantinople were\nhighly favourable to literature and science in the last half of the\nfifteenth century; when the Greek fugitives, by the rich and long-lost\ntreasures of classical knowledge which they brought, created a new and\nbrilliant era in letters and science; in Italy in the first instance,\nthen in Germany (at that time so closely connected with Italy), and\nlastly in the rest of Europe. The knowledge of their classical tongue\nand ancient literature had never been totally extinguished among the\nGreek scholars and ecclesiastics; but in their hands this knowledge\nremained a mere dead treasure, which was only afterwards turned to\nprofitable account, and to the service of society, by the more active\nspirit of the Europeans.\n\nThe better of the late Byzantine Emperors, particularly some of the\nPal\u00e6ologi, had cultivated the sciences, and, by their love and\nencouragement of learning, had given a new life to literature. Even in\nthe period immediately preceding the fall and conquest of\nConstantinople, many Greeks had taken refuge in Italy, particularly\nduring the various attempts made to bring about the re-union of the\nGreek with the Roman church;--attempts, however, which with the\nexception of a small number of individuals who went over to the\nCatholic church, were not attended with any general success. In Italy\nthe Greek fugitives established schools for their own language and\nliterature, and founded libraries; and if in the time of Petrarch few\nItalians could be named that were conversant with that language and\nliterature, (and among these zealous promoters of Greek learning,\nBoccaccio must be included with himself,) Florence now under the\nMedici, the first Cosmo, and Lorenzo the Great, became a flourishing\nseminary of Grecian letters and erudition; and at Rome also, the house\nof Cardinal Bessarion was a true Platonic academy of science. Even the\nstudy of the ancient Roman writers received a new stimulus, and was\nprosecuted with a more classical taste and spirit. Courtly literati,\nand Latin poets formed on the old classical models--political writers\nin the Latin tongue, which was still the language of diplomacy--statesmen\nand politicians of the greatest influence, trained up in the school of\nGreek and Roman history and politics--and polite dilettanti of Pagan\nantiquity,--all now gave the tone to this new and second epoch in the\nintellectual culture of Europe. But the ruling spirit and tone of the\nage proceeded mainly from the revival of the ancient literature and\nlearning of the Greeks. Natural philosophy, whatever extension it may\nhave received from the improvements in astronomy, and a more\ncomprehensive knowledge of the globe obtained by the discovery of the\nNew World, had not yet been wrought into a scientific form, capable of\nexerting, as it did afterwards, an effective influence on the European\nmind, or of giving it a new direction. In this period of the\nrestoration of science, some individuals, like Picus Mirandola, and\nabove all, the German Reuchlin, followed a Platonic track in search of\na more profound philosophy; or, like Bessarion, Marsilius Ficinus and\nothers, illustrated and diffused the philosophy of Plato. But these\nwere partial exceptions, and these first attempts were not always\nfaultless. Yet it must ever be a matter of regret that the beginning\nthen made towards a better and more profound philosophy should have\nbeen left unfinished. To this the old scholastic philosophy was then a\npowerful obstacle, and the spirit of anarchy, which the religious\ncontests of the following age called into existence, struck at the\nroot of all lofty speculation; and even in the flourishing age of the\nMedici, it was the \u00e6sthetic part of ancient literature, and the\npolitical application of classical knowledge, which formed the main\nand almost exclusive object of pursuit.\n\nThus this regeneration, as it was called, was very imperfect and\nincomplete; and, in a general sense, was really not such;--even in\nscience itself, the advantages which mankind had obtained, and which\nthey were so eager to display, were more like a passing blossom, than\na sound and vigorous root. Many of those classical spirits were more\nconversant and more at home in ancient Rome and Athens, in the\nmanners, history, politics of antiquity, or even in its mythology\n(then investigated with peculiar fondness and enthusiasm), than in\ntheir own age, in the existing relations of society, or in the\ndoctrines and principles of Christianity.\n\nThe prevailing character of this new epoch of intellectual\ncultivation, which succeeded to the scholastico-romantic period of\nEuropean art and science, was by those modes of thinking and those\nmodes of life, which, with more or less modification and variety, it\ndiffused over all the European countries; at the best a very partial\nenthusiasm for Pagan antiquity, not merely in the department of art,\nbut in the whole compass of literature, nay even in history, politics,\nand morals also. If we compare with the fearful commotions of the\nfollowing age this classical enthusiasm, often so ill suited to the\nexisting relations of society; its influence on the world will appear\nlike an enchanting draught, which intoxicated for a while the European\nnations, drew them after objects totally foreign, made them forget\nthemselves in an illusive consciousness of their intellectual\nrefinement, and lulling them into a false security, blinded them to\ntheir own corruption, and the greatness of the impending danger--the\nyawning abyss on whose verge they then stood.\n\n\n\n\n                        END OF LECTURE XIV.\n\n\n\n\n                            LECTURE XV.\n\n\n  General observations on the Philosophy of History.--On the\n    corrupt state of society in the fifteenth century.--Origin of\n    Protestantism, and character of the times of the Reformation.\n\n\nThe Philosophy of History--that is to say, the right comprehension of\nits wonderful course, the solution and illustration of its mighty\nproblems, and of the complex enigmas of humanity, and its destiny in\nthe lapse of ages--is not to be found in isolated events, or detached\nhistorical facts, but in the principles of social progress. Historical\nparticulars can only serve to characterize the inward motives, the\nprevailing opinions, the decisive moments, the critical points in the\nprogress of human society; and thus place more vividly before our eyes\nthe peculiar character of every age--each step of mankind in\nintellectual refinement and moral improvement. To this end, historical\ndetails are indispensable; for the ruling principles of social\ndevelopement are of a more exalted kind, and not mere organic laws of\nnature, from which as in physiology, when the first principle of the\ndisorder is well understood, we can accurately deduce and partly at\nleast determine beforehand, the nature of the different phenomena and\nsymptoms, the rule of health, the diagnostic of the disease, as well\nas the method of cure, the approach of the crisis, and its natural\ndeclension, without being obliged to go through the labyrinth of all\nthe different cases that may have ever existed. Again, it is not in\nthe history of man, as in natural history, where the structure of the\nvarious plants and animals forms by close analogy one connected system\nof species and genera; and where the growth, bloom, decay and\nextinction of individuals follow in an uniform order, like day and\nnight, or like the change of the seasons. But in the sphere of human\nfreedom; as man is a natural creature, but a natural creature endowed\nwith free-will, that is to say, with the faculty of moral\ndetermination between the good or heavenly impulse, and the wicked or\nhostile principle; all these organic laws of nature form only the\nphysical basis of his progress and history. And hardly do they form\nthis--but rather a mere disposition of which the direction depends on\nman, or on the use he makes of his own freedom. It is only when that\nhigher principle of man's free-will has been weakened, debased,\nobscured, extinguished, and utterly confounded, that those laws of\nnature can hold good in history. Then indeed the symptoms of a\ndiseased age, the organic vices of a nation, the prognostics of a\ngeneral crisis of the world may be determined to a certain extent with\nthe precision of medical science. Though the general feelings of\nmankind clearly declare the soul to be endowed with the faculty of\nfree-will; yet to reason, this freedom is an almost inextricable\nenigma, the solution of which must be furnished by faith. Or rather\nthis is a mystery, of which the key and explanation must be sought for\nin God and his Revelation; and the same will apply to every higher\nprinciple, that transcends nature, and nature's laws.\n\nAlong with the principle of man's free-will which rises above\nnecessity, that law of nature--there is another higher and divine\nprinciple in the historical progress of nations; and this is the\nvisible guidance of an all-loving and all-ruling Providence displayed\nin the course of history, and the march of human destiny, whether in\nthings great or small. But the power of evil is something more than a\nmere power of nature, and in comparison with this, it is a power of a\nhigher and more spiritual kind. It is that power whose influence is\nnot only felt in the sensual inclinations of nature, but which under\nthe mask of a false liberty, unceasingly labours to rob man of his\ntrue freedom. Thus Providence is not a mere vague notion, a formula of\nbelief, or a feeling of virtuous anticipation--a mere pious\nconjecture--but it is the real, effective, historical, redeeming power\nof God, which restores to man, and the whole human race their lost\nfreedom, and with it the effectual power of good. The problem of human\nexistence consists in this, that man in the great stage of history, as\nin the little details of private life, has to choose and determine\nbetween a true heavenly freedom, ever faithful and steadfast to God,\nand the false, rebellious freedom of a will separated from God. The\nmere licence of passion or of sensual appetite is no liberty, but a\nstern bondage under the yoke of nature. But as that false and criminal\nfreedom is spiritual, so it is superior to nature; and it is strictly\nconformable to truth, to regard him as the first author of this false\nliberty, whom revelation represents as the mightiest, the most potent,\nand the most intellectual egotist among all created beings either in\nthe visible or invisible world.\n\nWithout this freedom of choice innate in man or imparted to him,--this\nfaculty of determining between the divine impulse and the suggestions\nof the spirit of evil, there would be no history, and without a faith\nin such a principle, there could be no Philosophy of History. If\nfree-will were a mere psychological illusion; if consequently man were\nincapable of sentiment or deliberate action; if all in life were\npredetermined by necessity, and subject, like nature, to a blind,\nimmutable destiny; in that case, what we call history, or the\ndescription of mankind, would merely constitute a branch of natural\nscience. But such notions are utterly repugnant to the general belief\nand the most intimate feelings of mankind, according to which, it is\nprecisely the conflict between the good or divine principle on the one\nhand, and the evil or adverse principle on the other, which forms the\npurport of human life and human history, from the beginning to the end\nof time. Without the idea of a God-head regulating the course of human\ndestiny, of an all-ruling Providence, and the saving and redeeming\npower of God; the history of the world would be a labyrinth without an\noutlet--a confused pile of ages buried upon ages--a mighty tragedy\nwithout a right beginning, or a proper ending; and this melancholy and\ntragical impression is produced on our minds by several of the great\nancient historians, particularly the profoundest of them\nall,--Tacitus, who towards the close of antiquity, glances so dark a\nretrospect upon the past.\n\nBut the greatest historical mystery--the deepest and most complicated\nenigma of the world, is the permission of evil on the part of God,\nwhich can find its explanation and solution only in the unfettered\nfreedom of man, in the destination of the latter for a state of\nstruggle, exposed to the influences of two contending powers, and\nwhich commences with the first earthly mission of Adam. This is\nnothing else but the real and entire exercise,--the divinely ordained\ntrial of the faculty of freedom, imparted to the firstling of the new\ncreation,--the image of God, in the conflict and the victory over\ntemptation, and all hostile spirits. That man only who recognizes the\npermission of God given to evil in its at first inconceivably wide\nextent--the whole magnitude of the power permitted to the wicked\nprinciple, according to the inscrutable decrees of God, from the curse\nof Cain--and the sign of that curse--its unimpeded transmission\nthrough all the labyrinths of error, and truth grossly disfigured--through\nall the false religions of Heathenism,--all the ages of extreme moral\ncorruption, and eternally repeated, and ever increasing crime, down to\nthe period when the anti-christian principle--the spirit of evil shall\nusurp entire dominion of the world; when mankind sufficiently\nprepared, shall be summoned to the last decisive trial--the last great\nconflict with the enemy in all the fulness of his power:--that man\nonly we say, is capable of understanding the great phenomena of\nuniversal history in their often strange and dark complexity, as far\nat least as human eye can penetrate into those hidden and mysterious\nways of Providence. But he who regards every thing in humanity, and\nthe progress of humanity, in a mere natural or rationalist point of\nview, and will explain everything by such views; who though perhaps\nnot without a certain instinctive feeling of an all-ruling\nProvidence--a certain pious deference for its secret ways and high\ndesigns, yet is devoid of a full knowledge of, and deep insight into,\nthe conduct of Providence--he to whom the power of evil is not clear,\nevident, and fully intelligible; he will ever rest on the surface of\nevents and historical facts, and satisfied with the outward appearance\nof things, neither comprehend the meaning of the whole, nor understand\nthe import of any part. But the matter of greatest moment is to watch\nthe Spirit of God, revealing itself in history, enlightening and\ndirecting the judgments of men, saving and conducting mankind, and\neven here below admonishing, judging and chastising nations and\ngenerations; to watch this Spirit in its progress through all ages,\nand discern the fiery marks and traces of its footsteps. This\nthree-fold law of the world--these three mighty principles in the\nhistorical progress of mankind--the hidden ways of a Providence\ndelivering and emancipating the human race--next the free-will of man,\ndoomed to a decisive choice in the struggle of life, and every action\nand sentiment springing from that freedom--lastly the power permitted\nby God to the evil principle, cannot be deduced as things absolutely\nnecessary, like the phenomena of nature, or the laws of human reason.\nSuch a general deduction would by no means answer the object intended;\nbut it is in the characteristic marks of particular events and\nhistorical facts, that the visible traces of invisible power and\ndesign, or of high and hidden wisdom must be sought for. And hence the\nPhilosophy of History is not a theory standing apart and separated\nfrom history--but its results must be drawn out of the multitude of\nhistorical facts--from the faithful records of ages, and must spring\nup, as it were, of themselves, from bare observation. And here an\nunprejudiced mind will discern the motive, and also, the justification\nof the course we have pursued; for in the Philosophy of History, we\nhave not to do with any system--any series of abstract notions,\npositions, and conclusions, as in the construction of a mere\ntheory--but with the general principles only of historical\ninvestigation and historical judgment.\n\nIn the multitude, however, of historical phenomena, all things,\nespecially in times of great party-conflicts, are of a mixed nature,\nwhere in the selection of characteristic traits, we should rather\navoid than seek for any rude and violent contrasts. For while on the\none hand, in any great historical contest, we are bound to recognize\nthe full justice of the true cause, yet on the other, we shall often\nfind some flaw--some stain--some weak point connected with that\ncause--not inherent in the cause itself, but chargeable solely on\nhuman infirmity. Or when we must condemn the Revolution of any period,\nas pernicious in its general relations, and reprehensible in itself,\nwe shall often see some motive lie concealed in its origin--in its\nfirst proceedings, which taken in itself, and abstractedly of\nsubsequent errors, and the false consequences thence deduced,\ncomprises some important indications of right--some lofty aspirations\nafter truth. Every general assertion must be restricted by exceptions,\nand qualified by various modifications; and as in historical events,\nso in historical narration and speculation, nothing is so hurtful and\nunprofitable as an absolute mode of reflection, enquiry, and decision.\nThis remark we may apply by anticipation to the whole period of latter\nages, and as inculcating the necessity of that conciliatory spirit,\nwhich true philosophy cannot fail of adopting for its rule. It is only\nwhen we have gone very deeply into the varied and complex nature of\nthe circumstances of any age, and examined in their manifold bearings\nthose historical phenomena which attend or produce the critical\nturning-points, the decisive eras of history, that we can clearly\ndiscover the spiritual elements--the great ideas which lie at the\nbottom of a mighty revolution in society. In every other abstract\nscience, an exception from the rule appears a contradiction--but in\nthe science of history, every real exception serves but the better to\nmake us comprehend and judge the rest.\n\nSuch an exception I have now to point out in reference to my remarks\non the intellectual progress of Europe, in those two epochs of its\nmental cultivation, one of which I designated as the scholastico-romantic\nera, the other as the era of enthusiasm for the Pagan antique; the\nformer being inadequate to the wants of that age, as well as of\nposterity, and the other secretly destructive of the old Christian\norder of things. But on the whole, from the tone prevalent in either\nperiod, I do not know I could have otherwise characterized the spirit\npeculiar to those two epochs. Yet even in those periods, and in the\nsphere of philosophic and religious meditation, the spirit of\nChristianity showed itself independent of, and superior to the temper\nof the times; and between these opposite eras, we meet with works\ndisplaying a clear and beautiful simplicity of expression, united with\nthe utmost purity and depth of ascetic feelings. Among several others,\nI need only cite the German Thomas a Kempis, whose most celebrated\nwork has become a manual of devotion for all the European nations,\nwhile those who know the philosophic spirit which reigns in his other\nwritings, can well recognize in this the same clear masterly mind,\nwhich throwing off the abstruse forms of the school, pours itself\nforth in a most lovely simplicity of diction.\n\nI may be permitted to cite this glorious exception of a mind, that\namid the degenerate science of that age, rose into the pure atmosphere\nof Christian philosophy, inasmuch as it serves to throw a light on the\ngeneral spirit of the times. Had that mild light of moral truth and\ndivine charity not been then so rare an exception; had that spirit of\nChristian morality been somewhat more widely diffused; the violent\ncommotions in the following generation would not have occurred; for\nthey would have had no motive, nor object, nor any possible source of\nexistence. But in direct opposition to that pious Fleming, there was a\ngreat Italian writer, who gave the tone to the moral and political\nopinions of his age, and exerted the mightiest influence on his times,\nboth as a moralist and as a politician. I allude to Machiavelli, who\nmay serve as a proof, that the maxims and principles of Pagan\nantiquity, with which the scholars of that age were imbued, were not\nconfined to the departments of art and of imagination, or of mere\nerudition, but had a very powerful influence on politics: and however\nmuch one may attempt to excuse, or explain away the design of one of\nhis works,[7] still all his other political writings clearly and\nevidently shew that he was actuated by no other maxims of state-policy\nthan the old Roman and Pagan principle, of grasping, inexorable, and\nselfish cunning. This writer announced only with greater clearness and\nprecision what were already the prevailing principles of his times,\nand was thus the means of bringing those principles to fulness and\nmaturity.\n\nWhen the Christian bond of union between the European states and\nnations had been so completely dissevered, policy, together with all\nmoral principle, became for the most part Pagan, came to consider all\nmeans as lawful for its ends, respected not the sacredness of any\ninstitution, and was guided in all its projects by selfishness,\ncupidity, or ambition. Animated with this spirit, and guided by these\nviews, Lewis XI. consolidated the absolute authority of the crown in\nthe interior of his dominions, with the same inflexible perseverance\nof character, and the same consummate political art, which in his\nendeavours to maintain his power against the Duke of Burgundy and\nother neighbours, characterized his foreign policy. In Ferdinand the\nCatholic, King of Spain, who permanently united the two kingdoms of\nArragon and Castile, put an end to the Arab dominion by the conquest\nof Granada, and came into possession of the golden mines of America;\nthe arbitrary principles of policy and of government, which were then\nso generally prevalent, are particularly perceptible. The barbarous\npersecution, and the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, was certainly\nprejudicial to the welfare of the country, was in itself an act of\nreprehensible severity, and was, above all, a dangerous precedent for\nthe further extension and application of the same oppressive policy\ntowards the Arabian population (still very numerous in many provinces\nof Spain), and towards the peaceable descendants of the old Mahomedan\nconquerors. From the contests carried on in Spain itself, with the\nMahomedans for the space of eight centuries, a religious war almost\nentered into the system of national policy. The wisdom of a great and\nlenient monarch, like Charles the Fifth, might indeed mitigate the\nevils of the times, and as long as he lived, and as far as\ncircumstances permitted, might oppose a check to the torrent of the\nnew opinions in Germany. But with all his pacific endeavours he was\nunable either to prevent the rupture and separation of a part of\nGermany, or to stop the progress of arbitrary principles of\ngovernment, which under his successor on the Spanish throne, became\nperfectly irresistible. The intermixture of political and\necclesiastical affairs and institutions existed more or less\neverywhere, and in truth had a deep historical foundation in the\npeculiar circumstances of place; and unless we deeply investigate all\nthe particulars of those local circumstances, and accurately\ndiscriminate their several peculiarities, it would be difficult, and\nindeed rash to pronounce a general opinion respecting them--as so\nsweeping a judgment would give a false and erroneous turn to a censure\napparently well-founded, and often just in itself. The Inquisition in\nSpain for instance, was from the very peculiar character which it took\nin that country, far more a political than an ecclesiastical\ninstitute. If the secular power had been guilty of arbitrary and\nviolent encroachments on ecclesiastical jurisdiction, ecclesiastical\npower in its turn had from the spirit of the times become in many\nrespects too secular.\n\nWhen the Popes had returned to Rome from the captivity of Avignon,\nexperience taught them how necessary to their dignity and\nindependence was the possession of a sovereign principality, which\nhowever inconsiderable, should be at least free from foreign controul.\nNay, since the German Empire had become really extinct, or existed\nonly in name, it was the interest of the secular powers themselves,\nthat the political authority of the Pope within the ecclesiastical\nstates should rest on a firm and secure foundation, and should thus\nafford them a guarantee that the sovereign Pontiff would not again be\nin a state of exclusive dependance on any one of the different\npowers--divided as they now all were in interests, and animated by\nmutual jealousy. Without taking into account the personal scandals of\nAlexander VI., the mode in which some Popes, especially of the Borgia\nfamily, sought to consolidate their power within the ecclesiastical\nterritory, must have appeared very revolting in the spiritual heads of\nChristendom. And although Julius II. possessed many great and princely\nqualities; still an injurious impression must have been produced on\nthe public and popular mind, when the chief ecclesiastic, and a prince\nof peace girded on the sword, and put on the martial cuirass. The name\nof the Medicean Pope, Leo X., is one celebrated in the history of art\nand science, and serves to denote its most brilliant era; he possessed\nperhaps all the qualities most calculated to shed lustre round the\nthrone of a secular monarch; but he was not the Pontiff to discern\nthe fearful dangers and urgent necessities of the church in that age,\nto avert those dangers by his foresight, or to surmount them by\nconciliation.\n\nA succession of such Pontiffs immediately prior to the breaking out of\nthe Reformation, is of no slight historical importance. It would\nreally appear as if the church were destined, by the losses it\nexperienced, to learn the greatness of the danger to which its too\nworldly policy exposed it, and to be brought back by misfortune to its\ntrue, proper, and essential destination. Indeed at that time, the\nmaterials of political combustion were by no means wanting in Italy.\nEven in the absence of the Popes, a political fanatic, Rienzi, had\nexcited a Revolution for the purpose of restoring the ancient\nRepublic; and the internal feuds and civil wars of Florence were the\neffects of factions, almost inseparable from a state constituted like\nthe Florentine Republic. In the last period of civil disorder, shortly\nafter Lorenzo's death, a religious fanatic, the Dominican\nSavanarola--appeared at the head of a political Revolution; and his\nrevolutionary principles were strangely mixed up with his religious\ntenets. Here evidently is a fact not undeserving of attention, if we\nwould wish to form a right estimate of the state and circumstances of\nthat age--it is that the very origin of this new species of fanaticism\nor heresy, and not its ulterior progress (as in the case of the\nHussites,) was marked and accompanied by political commotions, and\ncrimes against the state.\n\nWhen that bond of religious unity--that high fellowship of Christian\nfeeling which had united the various states of Christendom, was in a\ngreat measure dissolved, the different powers of Europe (as is usually\nthe case among neighbouring independent nations, when directed by\nseparate views of policy) the different powers of Europe engaged in a\nsystem of alliances subject to various fluctuations, but all formed on\nthe principle of a mere dynamical equilibrium--just as if government\nand social power, even under the influence of Christianity, were\nnought but a mere material weight--a mere lever of physical force.\nEver since the expedition of Charles VIII. into Italy had provoked\nresistance, and occasioned a re-action, the dominion of that country,\nfor which Spain and France contended with all their might, was a\npeculiar subject of jealousy between those states, and gave rise to\nmany wars. The other powers that took an active part in this game of\npolitical alliances--this system of the balance of power,--were\nVenice, the Emperor Maximilian, and the Pope. How very much an active\nparticipation in affairs of so worldly a nature was unbefitting the\nlast-named potentate, I need not stop to observe. That conduct gave\noccasion afterwards to a great public scandal. For instance, when the\nPope had formed an alliance with the King of France against Charles V.;\nand to resent this, the Emperor's German army (among whom were a\ngreat many entertaining the opinions of Luther), had proceeded to the\nconquest of Rome; this was a fresh and mighty source of scandal at\nthat momentous epoch. Nay, the great dissatisfaction of the Emperor\nwith the conduct of some Popes (though this referred merely to their\npolitical acts), when coupled with his conciliatory conduct towards\nthe German Protestants, induced many to question the sincerity of his\nattachment to the Catholic faith. However false and unfounded such a\nsurmise might be, still all things contributed to foster the belief,\nand on all sides there was a concurrence of circumstances to lead the\npublic mind more and more astray.\n\nThe good and high-minded Emperor, Maximilian, who had meditated, and\nmight have accomplished many other noble projects and important\nenterprises, was compelled to labour during his whole life, though in\nvain, to discover in the total absence of all physical resources, some\ncounterpoise to the power of France, and some barrier and security\nagainst the encroachments of Turkish ambition. But when fortune had\nplaced on the head of Charles V. the united crowns of Spain and\nBurgundy, the necessity of choosing an Emperor, who like those of\nearlier ages, might be capable of coping with all the dangers of the\ntimes, was universally felt; and this feeling led to the election of\nCharles. But for this choice, the system of European states would\nhave fallen to pieces, and Christendom become a prey as well to\nforeign conquest as to internal anarchy. The mind of Charles was\nentirely occupied with the old idea of an universal Christian Empire,\nand a religious feeling was at the bottom of all his political schemes\nand enterprises. But whatever might be the extent of the countries\nover which he reigned, and whatever the apparent greatness of his\npower, yet amid the various designs he had to prosecute, and in the\nstruggle he had to maintain against the combined array of so many\nhostile elements, he felt the want of those real resources which are\nto be found in a compact and well-united monarchy. To the Spanish\ncrown he imparted great splendour, and even in Italy remained the\nmaster; but he met with very imperfect success in his efforts against\nMohammedan power--a power from whose oppressions, and still further\nencroachments, it was the first duty of the Emperor, as the armed\nProtector of Christendom, to defend the European states. His\nconciliatory policy towards the German Protestants did not attain its\nobject, for amid the general ferment of the age, the torrent of\nreligious opinions bore down all before it. His wish to re-establish\norder in church and state by means of a general council, and thereby\nto consolidate anew the old foundations of faith, was fully\naccomplished only after his death.\n\nIn all that regards the origin and first breaking out of the\nReformation, I wish to premise that all controversy on points of\ndogma, all controversy on the merits or demerits of individuals, the\nworthiness or unworthiness of persons, does not enter into the plan of\nthis work. My object is particularly to describe the various manner in\nwhich the religious revolution commenced in the three or four\ncountries over which it exerted the most remarkable influence; as well\nas the dissimilar form which it finally assumed in each of those\ncountries. I wish particularly to trace the influence of the\nreformation on the progress of Christian states, and on European\nliterature and science; two things which constitute the main subject\nof the last chapters of this Philosophy of History. But we must notice\nbriefly, and as far as is necessary to the elucidation of the subject,\nthe point of connection existing between persons and doctrines, and\nthe historical event which alone is the subject of our enquiries. In\nthe first place, it is evident of itself, that a man who accomplished\nso mighty a Revolution in the human mind, and in his age, could have\nbeen endowed with no common powers of intellect, and no ordinary\nstrength of character. Even his writings display an astonishing\nboldness and energy of thought and language, united with a spirit of\nimpetuous, passionate, and convulsive enthusiasm. The latter qualities\nare not indeed very compatible with a prudent, enlightened, and\ndispassionate judgment. The opinion as to the use which was made of\nthose high powers of genius must of course vary with the religious\nprinciples of each individual; but the extent of those intellectual\nendowments themselves, and the strength and perseverance of character\nwith which they were united, must be universally admitted. Many who\ndid not adhere afterwards to the new opinions, still thought at the\ncommencement of the Reformation, that Luther was the real man for his\nage, who had received a high vocation to accomplish the great work of\nregeneration, the strong necessity of which was then universally felt;\nfor no well-thinking man then dreamed of a subversion of the ancient\nfaith. If at this great distance of time, we pick out of the writings\nof this individual, many very harsh expressions, nay particular words,\nwhich are not only coarse, but absolutely gross, nothing of any moment\ncan be proved or determined by such selections. Indeed the age in\ngeneral, not only in Germany, but in other very highly civilized\ncountries, was characterized by a certain coarseness in manners and\nlanguage, and by a total absence of all excessive polish and\nover-refinement of character. But this coarseness would have been\nproductive of no very destructive effects; for intelligent men well\nknew that the wounds of old abuses lay deep, and were ulcerated in\ntheir very roots; and no one was therefore shocked if the knife,\ndestined to amputate abuses, cut somewhat deep. Luther acquired, too,\nthe respect of princes, even of those opposed to him. Thus when\nshortly after the commencement of the Reformation, a general\ninsurrection of peasants broke out, which renewed all the excesses of\nthe Hussites; Luther so far from exciting the rebels, like some of the\nnew Gospellers, opposed them with all the powers of his commanding\neloquence, and all the weight of his high authority; for he was by no\nmeans in politics an advocate for democracy, like Zuinglius and\nCalvin, but he asserted the absolute power of princes, though he made\nhis advocacy subservient to his own religious views and projects. It\nwas by such conduct, and the influence which he thereby acquired, as\nwell as by the sanction of the civil power, that the Reformation was\npromoted and consolidated. Without this, Protestantism would have sunk\ninto the lawless anarchy which marked the proceedings of the Hussites,\nand to which the war of the peasants rapidly tended; and it would\ninevitably have been suppressed, like all the earlier popular\ncommotions--for under the latter form, Protestantism may be said to\nhave sprung up several centuries before. And besides, none of the\nother heads and leaders of the new religious party had the power, or\nwere in a situation to uphold the Protestant religion--its present\nexistence is solely and entirely the work and the deed of one man,\nunique in his way, and who holds unquestionably a conspicuous place in\nthe history of the world. Much was staked on the soul of that man, and\nthis was in every respect a mighty and critical moment in the annals\nof mankind, and the march of time. The real problem for the age would\nhave been to terminate this unhappy confusion of doctrines, that is to\nsay, that disorder and not unfrequent confusion in the relations of\nthe ecclesiastical and civil powers, (occasioned by the general state\nof things in Europe, and by the circumstances which first promoted the\npolitical and intellectual civilization of the West)--in a word, to\ncompose the old dispute between church and state, and bring it to a\njust Christian settlement by a peaceful and amicable arrangement. Then\nthe many existing, though scattered, rays of true Christian piety,\nhumility, and self-denial, as well as the new discoveries in science\nwould have acquired a more intense and more extended power--an event\nwhich was now entirely prevented by a great civil war between two\nreligious parties, and was not brought to a full accomplishment till a\nmuch later period. But the total rejection of the traditions of the\npast (and here was the capital vice and error of this Revolution),\nrendered the evil incurable, and even for Biblical learning and\nphilology now so highly valued, the true key of interpretation, which\nsacred tradition alone can furnish, was irretrievably lost, as the\nsequel has but too well proved. And even if this were not the case,\nhow could mere learned institutes of Biblical philology, united with\npopular schools of morality, constitute the spirit and essence of a\nreligion? This is no where so fully understood, and so deeply felt,\nas in Protestant Germany at the present day--Germany, where lies the\nroot of Protestantism, its mighty centre, its all-ruling spirit, its\nvital power, and its life-blood--Germany, where to supply the want of\nthe true spirit of religion, a remedy is sought sometimes in the\nexternal forms of liturgy,[8] sometimes in the pompous apparatus of\nBiblical philology and research, destitute of the true key of\ninterpretation[9]; sometimes in the empty philosophy of Rationalism,\nand sometimes in the mazes of a mere interior Pietism.\n\nUndoubtedly even within the pale of Catholicism, we meet occasionally\nwith individuals who adopt the same, or at least very similar systems,\nwho either give in to the principle of Rationalism, or to a false\ntheological illuminism (as in the recent period of Neology), or like\nsome of the Jansenists, indulge in the unsafe and illusive suggestions\nof a sentimental mysticism. For the contests of two hostile parties\nwill not always prevent the imitation of defects, and the contagion of\nerrors; and this is only an additional reason, why in a work of this\nkind, we should abstain from entering more closely and minutely into\nthe nature of these controversies. In contemplating the first steps of\nthis great Revolution; in considering the circumstances of that\nperiod, we experience a feeling of regret, that the great problem of\nthat age, the arduous task which devolved on it, of accomplishing an\nuniversal regeneration and real Reformation of the world, should have\nremained unexecuted, from the very revolutionary turn which affairs\ntook--nay, that this task should not even have been understood or felt\nby any of the leading characters of the time. The earlier disputes\nbetween the spiritual and temporal powers had related to the dominion\nover certain territories, or over Ecclesiastical property in general,\nand especially to the jurisdiction of the state over the latter\nspecies of property. The allurements which the confiscation of church\nproperty held out to cupidity, must be ranked among the main causes\nwhich contributed to the diffusion of Protestantism. Thus, for\ninstance, Prussia, the country of the Teutonic order, was now\nconverted into a secular dutchy; and in the interior of Germany, a\ncelebrated knight,[10] led away by the spirit of that age of feud,\ninvaded one of the Ecclesiastical electorates, thinking no doubt, that\nthat state, like every other Ecclesiastical domain, was the lawful\nbooty of the first comer. But independently of these partial changes\nand minor transactions, (and in many Protestant countries, such as\nEngland and Sweden, church property remained inviolate, and even\nEpiscopacy was retained,) the hostility of the German Reformers to the\nchurch was of a different and more spiritual nature; and it was the\nreligious dignity of the priesthood which was more especially the\nobject of their destructive efforts. And this is the point, where\ndoctrinal controversy enters within the province of history; for the\npriesthood stands or falls with faith in the sacred mysteries. The\nrejection of these mysteries, by one half of the Protestant body in\nSwitzerland, France, England, and the Netherlands, Luther not only\ndiscountenanced, but strenuously reprobated; yet it was only by a\nsubtle distinction he attempted to separate those mysteries from the\nfunctions of the priesthood; and it was not difficult to foresee that\ntogether with faith in the sacred mysteries, respect for the clergy\nmust sooner or later be destroyed, as indeed experience has\nsufficiently demonstrated. For that great mystery of religion, on\nwhich the whole dignity of the Christian priesthood depends, forms the\nsimple, but very deep internal keystone of all Christian doctrines;\nand thus the rejection, or even the infringement of this dogma, shakes\nthe foundations of religion, and leads to its total overthrow. The\npacific conferences of learned and well-meaning men of both parties,\nthough often renewed, were not attended with real and ultimate success;\nalthough sometimes, in looking at the language of such a man as the\nmild Melancthon, we are almost perplexed to discover the few points\nwhich do not coincide with the old Catholic doctrines--so nearly akin,\nand almost identical do the two religious systems appear, when we\nmerely consider their separate parts. Equally fruitless were all those\nhonest attempts at pacification, incessantly made by the Emperor\nCharles, who sought by his interim to create delay, while he indulged\na secret hope, that the agitated waves of anarchy,--all that mighty\ntempest of opinion, would be allayed by time, and would finally be\nstilled. But that interim has been of longer duration than was at\nfirst calculated, and it still awaits the judgment of God for its\ngreat day of termination.\n\nWhen we consider Luther's original powers of mind, independently of\nthe use and employment which he made of those extraordinary powers,\n(for even the greatest comet, though it should cover half the heavens\nwith the splendour of its light, can never possess, or be supposed to\npossess, the sun's genial warmth;)--when I say, we consider the\nintellectual endowments of this extraordinary man solely in\nthemselves; the boldness of his speculations and the vigour of his\neloquence will be found to form an epoch, not only (as is universally\nacknowledged) in the history of the German language, but in the\nprogress of European science and European culture. After the first\nperiod in the intellectual history of Europe, which I denominated the\nscholastico-romantic epoch, and after the second, which I termed the\nepoch of enthusiasm for Pagan Antiquity, and in which a Christian\nsimplicity of eloquence and a depth of scientific enquiry appear as\nonly happy and occasional exceptions; a third epoch now arose, which\nfrom the general spirit of the age, and the tone of the writings,\nwhich exerted a commanding influence over the times, cannot be\notherwise designated than as the era of a polemico-barbarous\neloquence. This rude polemic spirit which had its origin in the\nReformation, and in that concussion of faith, and consequently of all\nthought and all science which Protestantism occasioned, continued,\ndown to the end of the seventeenth century, to prevail in the\ncontroversial writings and philosophic speculations both of Germany\nand England. This spirit was not incompatible with a sort of deep\nmystical sensibility, and a certain original boldness of thought and\nexpression, such, for instance, as Luther's writings display; yet we\ncannot at all regard in a favourable light the general spirit of that\nintellectual epoch, or consider it as one by any means adapted to the\nintellectual exigencies of that age. But with respect to the language\nand literature of Germany, so far as these are of general interest, I\nshould wish to make one observation. Besides Thomas \u00e0 Kempis, whom I\nhave already mentioned, I might cite several other religious writers\nof the fifteenth century and even of an earlier period, who though\nless known, were distinguished by a similar spirit, partly among those\nwho made use of the Latin language, then universally current, and\npartly among those who, like Taulerus, for example, made the German\nthe vehicle of their thoughts. And indeed were we to compare the\ngentle simplicity, the charming clearness of thought and expression\nwhich reign in the works of these writers, with the productions of the\nfollowing age of barbarous polemic strife, we should then be furnished\nwith the best criterion for duly appreciating the earlier and the\nlater period.\n\nWith respect to those institutes of the church, which had early\ndevoted themselves to the task of the propagation of the gospel, or of\nthe defence and support of religion, and made this spiritual conflict\nand holy engagement the business of their lives; it now happened, as\nit had often occurred before, that the proper defenders of the church\narose at that moment, and adopted that course and mode of defence\nwhich the circumstances of the church precisely required. The powerful\nprelates of the old Episcopal sees, who had rendered such high and\nimperishable services to the cause of European civilization, though\nthey might not be unfaithful to the original spirit of their calling,\nand might be no strangers to science, were, however, much too\ndependant on government, and mixed up in affairs of state. The more\npopular and mendicant orders, from their very nature and character,\nand their peculiar habits of life and modes of speech, were not always\ncalculated to exert due influence on government and the upper classes\nof society, while their ardent zeal, unmindful of times and\ncircumstances, often transgressed the bounds of moderation. The great\nwant of the age was a religious order, which established in opposition\nto Protestantism, should not be dependant on the state, but devoted\nexclusively to the interests of the church; a religious order, which\nwell equipped with modern learning, science and accomplishment,\npossessing a knowledge of the world, acquainted with the spirit of the\ntimes, and pursuing the course which expediency dictated, with\nprudence and circumspection, should undertake the defence of the\nCatholic religion, and the propagation of the gospel in foreign\ncountries, and worthily and successfully prosecute this twofold\nobject. Such an order was the society of the Jesuits in its first\ninstitution; and that among the founders and first members of this\norder, there were men of undoubted piety and eminent sanctity, men\nanimated by the sublimest principles of Christian self-denial,\npossessed of great intellectual endowments, and favoured by God with\nhigh preternatural powers, no unprejudiced historical enquirer will\ndeny. Whether the reproaches which have been made to many members of\nthis order, of having exerted an undue political influence, and\ndisplayed a spirit of intrigue and ambition in the history of this\nperiod, be well-founded or not, I shall not stop to enquire; because\nsuch charges at best can affect individuals only, and not the society,\nwhose very name indeed has become in our times the watch-word of party\nstrife and contention. The severest condemnation of the Jesuits\nproceeds from a quarter where we clearly discern the most implacable\nhostility to Christianity and to all religion; and this circumstance\nought to furnish the Jesuits with an additional claim to our good\nopinion; but any judgment on the merits of this society, as this is a\nquestion which more immediately regards the present age, is quite\nforeign to the purpose of the present work. If some members of the\norder adopted at this period those absolute maxims and principles of\npolicy and government, which in general characterized that age; and if\nthe writings of others were distinguished by that rude polemic tone\nand spirit spoken of above, and which was equally characteristic of\nthose times; it would be unjust to lay to the charge of the order, or\neven of particular members, failings and defects which were common to\nthe age, and a perfect exemption from which is the most rare of human\nexcellencies.\n\nA violent insurrection can be put down only by forcible means; but\nevery system of terror, of whatsoever nature, is sure to provoke,\nsooner or later, a re-action equally terrible. And if the dangerous\ndisease be checked by means merely external, and no healing remedy be\napplied to the root and principle of the disorder, nor used to\nrenovate the impaired organs of life--if the fire be smothered in its\nown flames--it will lie concealed beneath the ashes, and will burn in\nsecret, till the first casual and unlucky spark shall kindle it anew\ninto a fiercer blaze. Such, in my opinion, are the plain and obvious\nprinciples which the historian should bear in mind, while passing in\nreview periods of revolution like the one under consideration;\nprinciples, which even now are susceptible of no very remote\napplication.\n\nIn that first period of ferment which marked the birth of the\nreformation, the revolt of the peasants had been put down with amazing\npromptitude and vigour. It was but ten years later, when in the north\nof Germany, a new insurrection broke out, which from its religious\ncomplexion, seemed still more revolting, whose adherents sought to\nestablish on earth the invisible empire of God by fire and sword, and\nwhose new spiritual monarch, John of Leyden, made his triumphant entry\ninto Munster, amid many and dreadful excesses; till at last this\nsavage fanaticism was crushed, and (as invariably happens in similar\ncases), met with a bloody end.\n\nBut the most singular phenomenon at this momentous epoch was Henry\nVIII. of England: a prince who while he adhered to the Catholic\ndoctrines, and zealously asserted them against Luther, yet severed\nhis kingdom from the church, declared himself its spiritual head, and\nby that monstrous and unchristian combination of the two powers,\nappeared in the midst of Christendom, like the Caliph of England.\nWhen, too, we take into consideration the private life of this Prince,\nhis endless series of divorces, and the execution of his Queens; his\nconduct was a greater scandal to his contemporaries, and fixes a\ndeeper stain on the history of his age, than any other earlier example\nin Italy, or elsewhere, several of which have been already mentioned.\nThe executions on account of religion which took place under Henry,\nand which, as he was opposed to both Catholics and Protestants,\naffected the two parties alike, were of a peculiarly odious and\nblood-thirsty character. On this subject I wish to make one\nobservation. From the connection which then subsisted between church\nand state, a case might easily arise, where a religious error would\nbecome a political crime. When an insurrection originating in a\nreligious cause, breaks out and threatens the peace of society, like\nthe religious war of the Hussites, and the revolt of the German\npeasants, no other resource remains but to put down force by force.\nBut when the first violence has subsided, another and a better and a\ntruly moral remedy should, if possible, be applied to the evil; and\nthis remedy was not always administered in a right, benign, and truly\nChristian form. Strange and fanciful have been, in all times and\nplaces, the offsprings of human error. Thus even in the most modern\ntimes, and in a peaceful and civilized country, examples still occur,\nwhere religious errors lead their unhappy dupes to violent attempts on\ntheir own lives, or the lives of others; and a wise legislation and\nhumane judicature should rather treat these errors as mental diseases,\nthan judge them according to the rigid letter of criminal law. How\nmuch more should not this be the case, when religious error is\nconfined to the sphere of speculation, and is not attended with any\npractical consequences. It is often perhaps not easy to draw the line\nof demarcation between measures of wise precaution against the\nassaults of a dangerous fanaticism, and unchristian modes of\npunishment. But certainly the criminal process of Ecclesiastical\ntribunals at that period, was not only opposed to the spirit of\nChristianity, but at utter variance with the express and ancient\ncanons of the church, and urgent admonitions of the Fathers, that the\nchurch should strenuously avoid the shedding of blood. Men sought to\nevade this wise and beautiful law, by abandoning all executions to the\nsecular arm; but except in the punishment of actual crimes, and in the\nnecessary defence against open insurrection, we must admit that the\nspirit of this law was grievously violated. A vindictive criminal\njurisprudence, which was then dictated by the mutual rage of\ncontending parties, and which was made still more revolting to\nChristian feelings by the religious colouring it assumed, remains a\nstigma on that age; for it was the work not of one, but of both\nreligious parties, or to speak more properly, of members of both\nparties. The commencement, indeed, of this great disorder--of this\ngreat departure from the law of love--is to be found in the middle\nage, during the strife of exasperated factions; but how small are\nthose beginnings when compared with the excesses of subsequent times.\nWhen we hear the middle age called barbarous, we should remember that\nthat epithet applies with far greater force to the truly barbarous era\nof the Reformation, and of the religious wars which that event\nproduced, and which continued down to the period when a sort of moral\nand political pacification was re-established, apparently at least, in\nsociety and in the human mind.\n\n     [7] The Prince.\n\n     [8] Schlegel here alludes to the Ordinances promulgated\n     a few years ago by the King of Prussia, for the reform\n     of the Protestant Liturgy.\n\n     [9] The author here refers to that mania for Biblical\n     criticism, long prevalent in Protestant Germany, and\n     which however it may inform our reason, and gratify a\n     laudable curiosity, is in itself no guide to the\n     knowledge of religious truth.--_Trans._\n\n     [10] Schlegel here alludes to Prince Albert of\n     Brandenburgh.\n\n\n\n\n                         END OF LECTURE XV.\n\n\n\n\n                            LECTURE XVI.\n\n\n  Further developement and extension of Protestantism, in the\n    period of the religious wars, and subsequently thereto.--On\n    the different results of those wars in the principal European\n    countries.\n\n\nThe true Reformation, loudly demanded in the fifteenth century as the\nmost urgent want of the times, not only by the capricious voice of the\nmultitude, but by the first and most legitimate organs of opinion in\nchurch and state, and the nature of which had been long before clearly\nstated, and fully and generally understood,--ought to have been a\ndivine Reformation. Then would it have carried with it its own high\nsanction--it would have proved it by the fact--and at no time and\nunder no condition would it have severed itself from the sacred centre\nand venerable basis of Christian tradition, in order, reckless of all\nlegitimate decisions, preceding as well as actual, to perpetuate\ndiscord, and seek in negation itself a new and peculiar basis for the\nedifice of schismatic opinion. Such a vast, extensive, deep, and\neffectual Reform, which while it kept within the limits of ancient\nfaith, and steadily adhered to its divine centre, would at the same\ntime renovate and revivify the church, was not then accomplished. The\ndisciplinary canons of the council of Trent undoubtedly contained many\nwise, excellent and wholesome regulations, whose efficacy has been\nproved by the experience of the different Catholic countries, and\nwhose reception has been determined by the local circumstances of\neach; for these regulations intended for the correction and removal of\nabuses, and for the revival of ancient discipline, were not adopted\nwithout modification, nor received to a like extent in all Catholic\ncountries. On the other hand, with respect to the Protestants, the\ndecrees of the council of Trent, from the very nature of things, could\nbe only of a defensive character. Instead of the desired Reformation,\nProtestantism early enough announced itself as a new and peculiar\nreligion, and still more was it constituted as such; but the rupture\nwas already consummated--the evil had become incurable, before the\nremedy was applied. Protestantism was the work of man; and it appears\nin no other light even in the history which its own disciples have\ndrawn of its origin. The Partisans of the Reformation proclaimed\nindeed at the outset, that if it were more than a human work, it would\nendure, and that its duration would serve as a proof of its divine\norigin. But surely no one will consider this an adequate proof, when\nhe reflects that the great Mohammedan heresy, which more than any\nother destroys and obliterates the divine image stamped on the human\nsoul, has stood its ground for full twelve hundred years; though this\nreligion, if it proceed from no worse source, is at best a human work.\nBut even as the mere work of man, the Reformation was unquestionably a\nmighty, extraordinary, and momentous revolution, which when once it\nhad been outwardly established in the world, (though inwardly it\nremained in a state of perpetual agitation,) has thenceforward mostly\ndirected the march of modern times, influenced the legislation and\npolicy of the European states, and stamped the character of modern\nscience, down to our own days, when though its influence has not been\nso exclusive and undivided, as at an earlier period, it has been still\nthe main and stirring cause of all the great political changes, and\nall the new and astonishing events of our age. We must endeavour to\nview this great Revolution with the impartial eye of the historian,\nand labour duly to comprehend and judge it in all its manifold\nbearings, and in all its remote consequences; and if we should feel\ninclined to lament and deplore the long continuance of this unhappy\ndivision in the great European family, we should remember that such a\nfeeling of regret, however innocent and natural in our own bosoms, and\nin our own conviction, can furnish no adequate criterion for an\nhistorical decision. At any rate, we should in no case immoderately\nrepine at such an event, and murmur against Destiny, that is to say,\nthe ruling Providence which permits the occurrence of such evils. The\npermission by God of a mere human, unsanctioned enterprise, nay, of a\nmighty, general, protracted, and incurable division among mankind--a\nsystem of opposition with all its unhappy consequences, its moral\nimpediments, and its political disasters; such a permission forms, as\nI have already observed, the great enigma of history--the wonderful\nsecret of the divine decrees in the conduct of mankind, as well as in\nthe conduct of individuals. Perhaps this great enigma will then only\nbe perfectly unravelled, and the mystery which hangs over this\nsubject, then only be perfectly dispelled, when this mighty Revolution\nshall have been terminated, and brought to a close. Even now, the\nexperience we have acquired, however imperfect and limited it may be,\nmakes one thing evident; namely, that the influence of Protestantism\nhas not been confined to those states and countries where it became\npredominant, and where it received a public and legal establishment.\nFar greater was the danger, far more fatal were the consequences, when\nan open rupture, a formal separation from the church did not take\nplace, or had, if a temporary, at least no permanent existence--but\nwhere Protestantism, that is to say, the spirit of Protestantism, a\nlike or a kindred set of opinions, was infused into the moral system\nof countries externally Catholic, and secretly instilled into the\nveins of the body politic, gradually corroded its vitals; till at\nlast, amid a false and apparent repose, the long suppressed element of\nrevolutionary innovation infected with its deadly virus, opinion,\nscience, and lastly, government and society. The conscience in its\nenquiries after religious truth, to whatever decision it may come,\nonly looks to the determination of a point of faith as the sole clue\nof its investigations. But in historical enquiries, this rigid\nintersecting line of faith forms no adequate rule of judgment. The\nexperience of our own times, or that of the last generation has\nproved, that innovations in faith, politics and philosophy ingrafted\non a Catholic nation, are far more fatal to its repose, and that of\nits neighbours, than a system of Protestantism which has settled into\na state of permanent peace and stability. Hence for instance, the\npolicy and political interests of England, which is a state more than\nany other essentially Protestant, have often been in perfect\naccordance with the political system of an old leading Catholic power.\nAnd I would ask, has the Atheism of the eighteenth century been\nproductive of fewer commotions and less convulsion in the world, than\nProtestantism in the first period of its existence, or in the era of\nreligious wars; although the infidel party in the last century by no\nmeans constituted a distinct and separate sect, but was like a deadly\ncontagion of the spirit of the times, infecting all beside and around,\nabove and below it, whithersoever the wind of chance, or the breath of\nfanatic zeal might carry it.\n\nAccording to my own personal conviction, the theological point of view\nis to be preferred in historical enquiries as the best and final rule\nof investigation. But in these latter times, when religious opinion is\nso divided, and where the juridical view of things, in which each\nparty struggles to make out a favourable case for itself, leads only\nto endless disputes; the historian is compelled to view the diseased\nstate of society with the eye of a pathologist. In medicine it is\nconsidered far better and more advantageous, that a dangerous disease\nshould be got rid of in a decisive but happily terminated struggle for\nlife or death, than that by any sudden check given to the crisis, the\ndisorder should fall on any internal part, and thus attack and corrode\nthe vital powers. This principle, which the history of particular\ncountries has shewn to be equally applicable to man's moral existence,\nmay be applied to the general state of Europe at that period. If\nProtestantism had then been outwardly suppressed and put down, would\nit not have raged inwardly, that is to say, would not the most\nessential part of Protestantism, the spirit of Revolutionary\ninnovation, the spirit of destructive negation, rationalism, in a\nword, have secretly remained? And may we not conclude from the\nexamples of a partial experience, that that secret and inward working\nof the disease would have been far more dangerous and fatal?--I should\nwish that these and other like expressions before made use of, should\nnot be taken as so many categorical assertions; for the question of\ndoctrine, lying as it does beyond the reach of doubt, does not fall\nwithin the limits of my plan, and the perfect reconciliation of minds\nis not in the power of man, but can come only from God. But these\nexpressions are merely meant to convey a conciliatory view of things\nin history, (and, as is the proper duty of the philosophic historian,)\nto vindicate the ways of providence. Undoubtedly this great religious\ncontest, this long protracted struggle has tended to excite the\nemulation of both parties in the pursuits of learning, and the labours\nof science, to stir up a mutual vigilance in the moral conduct of\nindividuals, as well as in the administration of states, and thus to\nkeep both parties in a state of salutary watchfulness and activity.\nEven from the collision of these two conflicting elements, there has\nsprung up in some countries a new and third element, which though not\nsuch as could be desired, nor entirely conformable to Christianity,\nhas still been productive of important and remarkable consequences. Of\nthe eight or nine countries, in which Protestantism has obtained a\nfirm footing, and acquired a permanent existence, there are three in\nparticular, where it has been attended with mighty historical\neffects, and where the originally destructive conflict of hostile\nelements has given birth to three new and momentous phenomena in the\nhistory of mankind. These are, in Germany the religious pacification,\nwhich forms the basis of her future prosperity, stamps the peculiar\ncharacter of the German nation, and designates its future moral\ndestiny: in England, the highly valued, or as it is there called, the\nglorious Constitution of 1688, whose mere outward form, or dead\nletter, has been an object of desire to so many other nations:--lastly\nin France, the Revolution in philosophy, produced by the indirect\ninfluence of Protestantism, and the combination of so many Protestant,\nor semi-protestant elements, and which gave birth to a frightful\npolitical Revolution, which after a short intervenient period of\nmilitary despotism, has been succeeded in its turn by a mighty epoch\nof moral and social regeneration--a regeneration which indeed has not\nyet been consummated, which is still in a state of precarious and\nconvulsive labour, but is even on that account the more entitled to\nthe historian's attention.\n\nOf the countries immediately contiguous to Germany, the home and\ncradle of Protestantism, Switzerland was at the commencement of the\nReformation, the theatre of a fierce civil war, in which the Swiss\nReformer fell fighting on the field of battle. But the strong federal\nspirit of the Swiss, the necessity of mutual defence, and the nearly\nequal numbers and strength of both religious parties, produced at an\nearly period a religious pacification. The indirect Protestant\ninfluence which French Switzerland has exerted over France, has\ncontinued very great and powerful from Calvin to Rousseau. After the\nGerman treaty of Westphalia, the Austrian Emperors established in\nHungary, which was already half subdued by the Turks, and still more\nexposed to their ravages, the principle of religious toleration--a\nprinciple that became a received maxim of state, and was incorporated\ninto the very constitution of the country. In the last half of the\nsixteenth century, there penetrated into Poland the sect of Socinus,\nwhich professed tenets distinct from those of the primitive Reformers,\nand which with the usually rapid march of religious innovation, and\nschismatic dissent, had now rejected along with the great Mystery of\ndevotion, the fundamental article of Christian theology, the doctrine\nof the Trinity. As long as the Socinians formed a distinct and\nseparate body of religionists, they were not very numerous in Poland,\nor elsewhere; but during the prevailing infidelity of the eighteenth\ncentury, they acquired many more disciples, and in many countries have\nbecome almost the predominant sect.--How Prussia, the land of the\nTeutonic order was transformed into a secular duchy, which for about a\ncentury remained connected with Poland, I have already had occasion to\nobserve. Into no country of Europe was Christianity introduced so\nlate as into Lithuania, where the faith was planted only towards the\nend of the fourteenth century. In the ancient Russian provinces of\nPoland, as well as in Hungary and other neighbouring countries, a\nlarge portion of the population belonged to the Greek church. In the\ngreat struggle of the following age, and in the perpetual wars which\nPoland had to sustain against Turkey, Sweden and Russia, all these\nhostile and heterogeneous elements of which I have spoken, and to\nwhich may be added the real or apparent attachment of the religious\nDissenters to Sweden, increased the general ferment and confusion in\nthe Polish state, down to the final dissolution and dismemberment of\nthe kingdom. Russia, which towards the end of the fifteenth century\nhad been restored to a high degree of power and splendour by Wassili\nIvanowitch, (who entertained the most friendly relations with the\nEmperor Maximilian, and who had established in his Empire the German\nHanseatic league), Russia still remained totally separated from the\nEuropean community, and was exempt from the influence of\nProtestantism, like Spain and Italy at the opposite extremity of\nEurope. The Scandinavian countries at the commencement of the\nfifteenth century, had been incorporated into one state, and\nconsidered merely in a geographical point of view, they might have\nformed a great and lasting power in the North; and under many\nvicissitudes, they remained united till the sixteenth century. Yet\nthe voice and feelings of the two nations were against the Union; and\nGustavus Vasa effected at once the total and definitive separation of\nSweden from Denmark, the establishment of his own monarchical sway in\nthe former country, and the introduction of Protestantism, which was\nbrought into Sweden, not as in other countries, by the torrent of\npopular opinion, but by the arm of power--by the authority of a\nsovereign who knew how to conduct the enterprise with steady\nperseverance, and slow, patient and consummate skill. In Sweden,\nhowever, Episcopacy was retained. By its situation betwixt Prussia and\nPoland, and by the Protestant influence in Germany, Sweden became for\na time in the seventeenth century a great European power; and to this\npolitical eminence the personal qualities of Gustavus Adolphus, as\nwell as of several other Swedish monarchs principally contributed. In\nSweden, Protestantism did not give rise to any events of a new and\npeculiar character, or of great historical moment, as in England and\nGermany. The Reformation was established in Denmark, chiefly though\nnot exclusively as in Sweden, by sovereign power; in Iceland, its\nestablishment was almost the work of violence. In those still regions\nof the North, the real abuses and scandals existing in the Catholic\nchurch were neither so great nor numerous as in the Southern\ncountries. There was greater simplicity of manners; and corruption\nwas much less diffused, much less generally known than even in\nGermany; and thus the ancient faith had struck deeper roots in the\nminds of men, and could not be eradicated but with difficulty. To that\nold Revolutionary spirit of the Swedes, which in their earlier history\nhad often displayed itself in the party-contests of their high\naristocracy, a wider field was now opened by the Reformation\nintroduced by the court; and armed in the Protestant cause, this\nspirit found fuller scope in the troubles of Poland, in its connection\nwith Prussia and other states, and above all, in the great religious\nwar of Germany. When at a later period, and after the Swedish\nascendancy in Europe had passed away, this spirit became compressed\nwithin narrower limits, and was thrown back upon itself, it then broke\nout into many violent internal commotions.\n\nIt was only under the successor of the despotic Henry that\nProtestantism was really introduced into England; but it there\nappeared under two different forms, and with two parties in a state of\nmutual and violent hostility. In England Episcopacy was retained; but\nin Scotland, the Puritans, the Methodists of those days, had the\nascendant. But under Queen Mary, the wife of Philip II., King of\nSpain, a Catholic re-action took place; and this again was succeeded\nby a Protestant re-action under Elizabeth, whose steady and inflexible\npolicy alone consolidated the establishment of Protestantism--a policy\nat whose shrine the head of the unhappy Mary Stuart fell a sacrifice.\nThus things proceeded from one extremity to another--from the\nexecution of King Charles I. to the establishment of a Republic, and\nthe absolute sway of a Protector--till amid the various disputes of\nthe Scotch and English Protestants, and the various struggles of\nnational rivalry, the court fell back upon Catholicism. At last, King\nWilliam from Holland, a century before the breaking out of the French\nRevolution, gave the final triumph to Protestantism, and brought to\nmaturity the glorious constitution of that island, which has been so\nrepeatedly transplanted, imitated and modified on the Continent and in\nother parts of the world. On this basis, a thorough Protestant policy\nwas established, which affected even the public and international law\nof Europe--a policy which has so eminently characterized England in\nmodern times, particularly during the period of her great power, and\nwhich was followed, or even accompanied by a Protestant philosophy. I\nshould premise that this Protestantism in philosophy should not by any\nmeans be confounded with, but should carefully be distinguished from,\nthe Revolutionary philosophy--from an unbridled anarchy in science and\nspeculation, though the former in its corruption may easily degenerate\ninto the latter. For the modern Paganism--the avowed Atheism of the\neighteenth century acquired many more partisans and assumed a far\nbolder attitude on the Continent, than in the Constitutional island,\nwhich even in philosophy oscillates in a sort of artificial equipoise\nbetween truth and error.\n\nIn the Netherlands, Protestantism was indeed a strong co-operative\ncause, but not the only cause of the rupture with Spain; for even in\nearlier times the Burgundian spirit had been prone to turbulence, and\nthe arbitrary rule of the Spaniards had excited in other countries\nalso general dissatisfaction, aversion, and resistance. When the\nProtestant half of the Netherlands had separated from Spain, and had\nestablished the sovereign and independent state of Holland, the latter\never exerted a powerful influence on England in all religious and\npolitical matters, in the same way as Belgium has ever exercised a\nmarked influence over France. But in Holland, Protestantism did not\ngive rise, as in Germany and England, to any events of a new and\npeculiar character, if we except the general toleration of religious\nsects, which was there carried to a further extent than in any other\nstate.\n\nIn her own interior, Spain had an arduous problem to solve--she had to\novercome the old energetic resistance of a whole people,--the\ntolerably numerous descendants of the former lords and conquerors of\nthe country, who still adhered to the Arabian manners and language,\nand even in part professed the doctrines of Mohammedanism. This\nstruggle, which commenced under Philip II. by very severe laws\nagainst the Moriscoes, terminated under Philip the Third, with the\nbarbarous expulsion of the whole Moorish population to the coasts of\nAfrica. That from the intimate and manifold relations which existed\nbetween Spain and Germany under Charles V., the armies of the Emperor\nmay have introduced into Spain the opinions of the new German\ngospellers to a greater extent perhaps than can be now stated with\ncertainty, or than is now susceptible of minute and accurate proof, is\nby no means improbable; and this fact would serve to explain, though\nnot entirely to justify many acts of the Spanish government. At any\nrate, the Spanish mind and character, in other repects so generous and\nupright, so little prone to selfish cunning or fickle frivolity,\nbecame in the long strife and animosities of a fierce religious war,\nmore and more partial and exclusive, arbitrary and violent. There yet\nlingered, however, many chivalrous virtues peculiar to this\nhigh-minded nation--many extraordinary and lofty effusions of\nreligious genius, such as are displayed in the wonderful writings of\nSt. Theresa, whose holy meditations are couched in language of such\ninimitable beauty. Among no other people did the spirit and character\nof the middle age, in its most beautiful and dignified form, so long\ncontinue and survive in manners, ways of thinking, intellectual\nculture, and works of imagination and poetry, as among the Spaniards;\nand it is not the mere effect of chance, but it is a very remarkable\nand characteristic fact, that in Spain alone, the peculiar poetry of\nthe middle age attained to its utmost perfection, and reached its last\nexquisite bloom.\n\nIn Italy, too, art and poetry flourished in her beautiful language;\nand classical erudition made considerable progress, and even arrived\nto a very advanced state, during that troubled period when the rest of\nEurope was involved in religious disputes and civil wars. But the fair\nand flourishing Italian literature of that age may be compared to a\nblooming garden, situated on a volcanic soil. No immediate danger then\nthreatened Italy, though we are not to estimate private opinions by\nthe standard of those which publicly prevailed; there were at least no\npublic examples of that excessive partiality and passionate enthusiasm\nfor Pagan antiquity, which occurred in that earlier and brilliant\nperiod of moral ferment and false security--the fifteenth century. On\nthe contrary, in some individual instances the real progress of\nscience was impeded, and on the whole its march retarded by a dread of\nthe danger of its abuse; and hence the old scholasticism remained\nlonger than was right in hereditary possession of its exclusive\nempire, although that contentious and partly negative Rationalism of\nthe middle age was ill calculated to supply the place of a truly\nChristian philosophy, which the circumstances of the church then so\nimperiously demanded. It should then have been borne in mind, that\nevery new error--every new shape which the old Proteus may assume in\nthe changing spirit of time, requires, not indeed a new philosophy\n(for philosophy itself, which is, as the ancients said, the science of\ndivine and human things, is in the sanctuary of its highest subjects\nand problems an edifice unchangeable through all ages, and built on\nthe everlasting foundation of divine truth), but a new form and\ndirection given to philosophy, a new resuscitation of its powers.\nIndeed the venerable Bishop and holy man of God, St. Charles Borromeo,\nhad in his Manual of Religion furnished an example, in which we see\nthe utmost profundity of ascetic science united with a beautiful\nlucidness of expression, and the greatest simplicity and purity of\ntaste. But the regular philosophy of the schools remained for a long\ntime yet much too scholastic; and it was prejudicial, or at least\ndisadvantageous to the Catholic cause, that the first foundations of a\nbetter philosophy, of one at least more faithful to its high vocation,\nand of an enlarged and improved science, should have been laid by men,\nlike Bacon and Leibnitz, who belonged to the opposite party.\n\nProtestantism had penetrated into France from French Switzerland, as\nthe very name of Hugonots indicates. The religious wars in France\nbroke out much later than in Germany; and the religious disputes in\nthat country had this distinctive character; that the Princes and\nnoble leaders of the Opposition, the factious among the high\naristocracy, and the contending parties at Court, made the Protestants\n(who formed indeed only the minority among the people, and still more\nin the state, but yet a very important and powerful minority), the\ntools and instruments of their own political designs and intrigues. It\nis this peculiar combination of circumstances which has stamped the\ncharacter of the French religious wars, and which distinguishes them\nfrom those of Germany. The religious wars in the former country were\nnot of such long and uninterrupted duration, nor were they of so\ndestructive and desolating a character as the thirty years' war. On\nthe other hand, the treaties of religious pacification were of much\nshorter duration, and were renewed even five or six times, for they\nwere ever followed by new insurrections. Even the edict of Nantes,\nwhich was destined to terminate this long anarchy, did not prevent the\nrecurrence of troubles after the assassination of Henry IV., and was\nitself totally repealed at a subsequent period. The various political\nintrigues of discontented nobles, and of factious leaders of the\nOpposition, gave a very hateful complexion to the religious wars in\nFrance; and that disposition to vindictive retaliation, which swayed\nparties in the various alternations of power, presented formidable,\nand almost insurmountable obstacles to the establishment of a\npermanent religious peace. That odious character in the religious wars\nof France, appears in England under equally revolting colours in the\ndespotism of the eighth Henry, in the crafty policy of Elizabeth, in\nthe great anarchical and regicide rebellion, and in the tyranny of\nCromwell, and has been often and strongly pourtrayed by the national\nhistorians. It is extremely worthy of remark, as the fact serves to\nexplain many posterior events in history, that the struggle in France\nremained undecided, partook from first to last of an uncertain and\nfluctuating character, and led neither to the establishment of a free\nConstitution, as in England; nor to the foundation of a firm, lasting,\nand irrevocable religious pacification, as in Germany. But this\nstruggle remained an unsolved problem of state-policy, like the\nreligious dispute itself--a dispute whose contagion infected the\nCatholics themselves, inoculated that portion of the population, and\ncontinued to rage among their descendants. In France, the Protestants\nwere in a decided minority, and it was by other and subordinate causes\nthat they acquired a temporary power and importance in the first\nreligious wars; but in England they probably became the majority at a\nvery early period, though not such an overwhelming majority as they\nform at the present day.\n\nThe Catholic and Protestant parties then divided Germany into two\nnearly equal portions, as in point of numbers they do at the present\nday; and although political power does not depend on numbers,\nparticularly when, as was at that time the case, so many\nheterogeneous elements were combined, yet both the contending parties\nwere sufficiently strong not to succumb easily in the contest. It is\nthis fact which ultimately established the necessity of a cordial and\npermanent religious peace, and caused that necessity to be so\nuniversally acknowledged. But this very equality of numbers, and still\nmore the active interference of almost all the great continental\npowers in the contest, rendered it at first more obstinate and\nlasting. Never was there a religious war, so widely extended and so\ncomplicated in its operations, so protracted in duration, and\nentailing misery on so many generations. That period of thirty years'\nhavoc, in which the early civilization, and the noblest energies of\nGermany were destroyed, forms in history the great wall of separation\nbetween the ancient Germany, which in the middle age was the most\npowerful, flourishing, and wealthy country in Europe, and the new\nGermany of recent and happier times, which is now gradually recovering\nfrom her long exhaustion and general desolation, and rising again into\nlight and life from the sepulchral darkness--the night of death, to\nwhich her ancient disputes had consigned her.\n\nWe can be little astonished at the origin of this war--indeed it is\nalmost a matter of surprise that hostilities did not break out sooner;\nand the very fact that external warfare was so long suppressed, may\naccount for the violence and animosity of the first conflict. The\nfirst religious peace was in reality a mere truce--another prolonged\ninterim which still left many debateable points, that with the most\nhonest intentions in both parties it was extremely difficult, and\nalmost impossible to settle by a peaceful and equitable adjustment.\nWhere so much combustible matter existed, the merest accident might\nenkindle a conflagration. This first occurred in Bohemia, where the\nold insurrection of the Hussites had been put down by force--(the only\nway in which on its first outbreak, it could have been suppressed) but\nwhere as it now appeared that no vital remedy had been applied to the\nroots of the disorder, much diseased and inflammable matter yet\nremained. Still the revolt of Bohemia was not the only cause or\nsubject of a war, which some historians have considered rather as a\ncomplicated series of wars, partially varying in their object. The\nwhole country--the age itself seemed involved in warfare; and war\nappeared as the permanent policy, the ruling spirit, the inveterate\nhabit, and natural necessity of mankind. As a masterly hand[11] has\nseized and pourtrayed many events and incidents--many scenes and acts\nof this great tragedy--the religious feelings, and steadfast and\ninflexible character of the Emperor Ferdinand II.--the high military\nglory and conquests of the Swedish monarch Gustavus Adolphus--and the\ngenius and disastrous fate of the General Wallenstein;--it is\nunnecessary to dwell at any length on these great historical\nrecollections, though the subject is inexhaustible in itself. The\npeace which was the fruit of a high and imperious necessity, is in the\npoint of view we here take, of far greater interest.\n\nWith respect to indemnities, the treaty of Westphalia did not differ\nfrom any other treaty of general peace, in which lands and parcels of\nland are to be allotted, and even secularized, but where the number of\nclaimants exceeds the portions of allotment. Considered, too, as a\ntreaty which restored, and fixed on a firm basis, the peace of the\nGerman Empire, the treaty of Westphalia did not depend in this, as in\nother respects, on the force of its own articles, but on the general\nsystem of European policy--on the principle of the balance of power\nwhich regulated that policy--a principle which then, and still more in\nlater times, this treaty has much contributed to diffuse and extend.\nBut it is as a solemn pact of religious peace, that I wish here\nparticularly to consider the treaty of Westphalia--as the final\nconclusion of all religious wars (and in this respect it has never\nbeen materially violated)--as a lasting covenant of religious freedom,\nwhose main principle continues deeply implanted in the German mind,\nwhile the two other relations in which this treaty remained so\nincomplete, have for the most part lost their practical interest.\nWhen we contemplate, too, this treaty as a noble labour of equity--the\nsuccessful work of unwearied industry, it has no parallel among\npreceding treaties of peace; and hence it has become the basis of the\ninternational law of Europe, and the textbook of diplomatic science in\nmodern times even down to our own days. Hence its long, undisturbed\nduration. The nations--the age itself blessed it as the termination of\ntheir long calamities; but far greater has been its influence on\nafter-times. The religious peace which it established, has become in\nmodern times a national habitude--a second nature to the German\npeople; for here and no where else must we look for its high\nhistorical destination. It may be said that this, like every other\npeace where the question of right remains the subject of dispute, is\nonly a truce--another mere interim--but it is a sacred and eternal\ntruce--a divine interim--that is to say, an intermediate state of\npeace to last till God shall pronounce his final and unfailing award.\nOf little moment to the philosopher, who considers this religious\npeace in its vast bearings on the past, the present, and the momentous\nfuture, is the reflection of the Jurist how far, and under what\nrestrictions this treaty in the altered circumstances of recent times,\ncan be considered as really valid and politically binding. For more\nthan any other treaty, has this solemn pact of religious peace been\ninterwoven with life, and become a reality. And when we take a wide\nsurvey of the world, and include the future in our prospective ken, we\nmay say, that now that most of the separate articles of this treaty\nhave lost their value, and are no longer susceptible of execution, the\ngeneral spirit and object--the high import of this religious peace are\nmuch nearer their fulfilment than formerly, when the practical\napplication of this treaty to particular cases was solely considered.\nFor that outward, but lasting covenant of religious peace--that holy\ntruce and interim forms the prelude and introduction to another,\nhigher, far more comprehensive, spiritual and divine peace, for which\nour age--the epoch of a mighty regeneration--is irrevocably destined.\nFor how can Christianity, that is to say, eternal truth itself, be for\never torn by divisions? The solution of the great problem of the last\nthree hundred years is by no means complicated, if we understand it in\nthis sense, but extremely simple. For, if as it is the object of all\ntrue and elevated philosophy to prove, faith and science are really\nand essentially one, faith will be restored to its former unity, and\nthen the schism between faith and science will cease.\n\nEven as regards the political relations of the present times, this\ngreat, fundamental treaty of peace has become a new Christian basis of\ninternational law; for the spirit of Christianity requires that where\nabsolute justice, which is rarely attainable, cannot be found, a\nsystem of peaceable and equitable compromise should before all things\nbe preferred. And hence this treaty has, for all succeeding times,\nstamped the pacific and conservative policy of the great German power\nof Austria. In France and England, indeed, religious wars afterwards\noccurred; but they were merely the last agitations--the after-pains of\nthat fearful period of convulsive labour. These commotions were soon\nallayed; and the example and precedent of this great religious\npacification in Germany, highly and universally admired as it was,\ncaused the principle of religious toleration to be tacitly\nacknowledged as one which religion and necessity alike prescribed for\nthe imitation of all Europe.\n\nAmong the last and most frightful consequences of the general\nrevolution in the church, was the calamitous execution of King Charles\nthe First, which for the sake of order, I have previously adverted to,\nand which took place a year after the establishment of the great\nreligious peace in Germany, and was followed forty years afterwards by\nthe great national peace of England--the final settlement of the\nBritish constitution. Among the lamentable events which occurred at\nthat period in France, was the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, the\nlast, and comparatively speaking, the most solid and durable of the\ntreaties of religious peace made in that country--a revocation which\ncan by no means astonish us, since this edict, destitute of all\ninternal and external guarantees, and which emanated solely from\nabsolute power, could not offer the same security, nor possess the\nsame durability, as the great, fundamental treaty of Westphalia. Yet\nboth in France and abroad, this measure, so appalling to the whole\nEuropean world, was, after so long an interval, extremely unexpected.\nOne of the effects of this measure was a cruel war of extermination\ncarried on in the mountains of the Cevennes against the Protestants,\nwho appear to have there derived a part of their tenets from some of\nthe earlier sects of the middle age. With respect to the revocation of\nthe Edict of Nantes, considering it merely as an act of authority, and\nindependently of the blow which it gave to the establishment of a\npermanent religious peace, we can only say that such an abuse of power\non the part of the majority, (and it is to the influence of a\npreponderant majority this act was ascribed by public opinion,) such\nan abuse of power was a very dangerous precedent in the native land of\nall violent reactions; and thus in our days the emigration of the\nFrench nobility has been the great historical counter-blow to the\nbanishment of the Hugonots.\n\nThis violent expulsion of the Protestants could not even accomplish\nthe immediate object of its authors; for the spirit of Protestantism\nhad struck much too deep roots in France; and the evil could not be\nremoved by mere physical force, and without the application of a moral\nremedy. The Protestant influence of French Switzerland was not\ndestroyed, and indeed it became still more powerful in the sequel;\nwhile a far deeper wound was inflicted on the Catholic cause in France\nby the spread of Jansenistical principles from the Netherlands, which,\nsupported as those principles were by great literary talents, exerted\nthen a mighty influence over the French nation. The essence of\nJansenism was the Rationalism of Calvin, combined with feelings of\npietism, and covered over with a deep varnish of Catholicism. It was\nnot the small party of the Jansenists of Utrecht, excluded as they\nwere from the church, and completely separated from the two great\nreligious parties of Europe, that could injure the Catholic cause in\nFrance; but it was that modified or disguised Jansenism which had\ncrept into the very bosom of the Gallican church, and there grew up in\nsecret, that was most to be feared. All these partial or disguised\ninfluences of the spirit of Protestantism derived their full sanction\nfrom the theory of a Gallican church, such as it was proclaimed by the\nsupreme authority in the state. In the Protestant constitution of\nEngland, indeed, the principle of a National church, like the\nAnglican, (however such a principle may be opposed to the very essence\nand fundamental maxims of Christianity), is not inconsistent with the\norigin and general doctrines of that church. But in the Catholic\nchurch, where the principle of national dissent is not admissible to a\nlike extent, such a system is perfectly absurd, and carries with it\nits own refutation. The older theory of a Germanic church cannot be\nhere adduced as an historical precedent; for that theory was started\nwith a view to regulate the external relations of the church, or to\nfix with more precision the limits of the Papal and Imperial power,\nbut did not refer to matters of doctrine, or to the internal\ndiscipline of the church. Yet with this system of a Germanic church,\nin the period of the Ghibelline ascendancy, many errors were mixed\nup--the first germs of the schism afterwards consummated. But this\ndisguised, half-schism of the Gallican church, not less fatal in its\nhistorical effects than the open schism of the Greeks, has contributed\nvery materially towards the decline of religion in France, down to the\nperiod of the Restoration. It was not only the dispute with Rome,\nwhich Louis XIV. carried to such fearful extremes; but the alliances\nhe so frequently renewed with the Swedish conqueror, and with the\nTurkish power (still so formidable to the whole of Christendom), which\nmust, as coming from a Catholic quarter, have given much scandal to\nthe age; and we must at least allow that the foreign policy of Lewis\nXIV. was scarcely in any respect Christian, and that it prepared the\nway for that relaxation of moral and religious principles which took\nplace in France under his feebler successors. Lewis XIV. undoubtedly\nwell knew how to strengthen his regal prerogative, and render it more\nabsolute, and in this work, like several of his predecessors, evinced\nthe most systematic art, and the greatest determination of character.\nBut all the great problems of that age--all the religious questions\nwhich then divided the world, which forming as they did the highest\nobject of all practical reflection and conduct were then so warmly\nagitated, could not be brought to a permanent, adequate, and generally\nsatisfactory solution by the capricious mandates of power, or the\npartial adjudications of regal authority. And if in this establishment\nof absolute power in the interior, no regard is paid to the lawful\nrights either of Foreign nations, or of the people at home, what\nsecurity is there that such a system will or can endure?\n\nThe splendour of the then French literature is one of the main pillars\non which the glory of that reign and century depends--this literature\nwhich attained so high a degree of perfection, contains however to\nsome extent the germs of that political scepticism, and those\nreligious errors, which led to the disasters of subsequent times. An\n\u00c6sthetic cristicism of pure art, falls not within the limits of the\nplan I have traced out to myself, and I can notice subjects of this\nnature only inasmuch as they serve to denote the character of\nparticular ages and nations. As in no country was the spirit of the\nmiddle age--the scholastico-romantic character of the first period of\nEuropean cultivation, both in the tone of feeling and the mode of\nexpression so long preserved, nor raised to such a state of high\nrefinement and beautiful perfection, as in Spain; so we may say that\nthe peculiar characteristic of the French mind in the age of Lewis\nXIV. consisted in a studious and minute avoidance of the two principal\ndefects in the intellectual productions of the middle age--the\nscholastic vagueness and obscurity in works of speculation on the one\nhand, and the fantastic wildness in works of imagination on the other.\nThat choice and exquisite taste which prevails in all those models of\nsecular and clerical, historical, poetical, and philosophic eloquence,\nwhich that age produced in such abundance, originated in this species\nof precision averse from all excess and obscurity. And it was by the\nclearness and lightness it owed to this principle that the French\nlanguage became, in the eighteenth century, the universal model and\nmost convenient medium, not only of conversation, but of epistolary\ncommunication, among the polite classes of all European nations. But\nin a comprehensive survey of general literature, this standard of a\npleasing style must not be considered as universally applicable, or\nhigher than any other; and without wishing to compare objects totally\ndissimilar in themselves, I may observe that although among all the\nclassical writers and orators of that age, Bossuet is the greatest in\npoint of style, and at the same time the most solid and intellectual,\nyet the _naive_ loquacity and infantine simplicity which\ndistinguish the incorrect, old French diction of St. Francis of Sales,\nare peculiarly graceful and attractive in themselves; while in the\ndepth and clearness of the ascetic spirit, the Saint far surpasses the\nformer writer more celebrated in the world.\n\nIn the regular philosophy of the schools, the Latin was mostly the\nprevailing language during the seventeenth century. In this the system\nof Descartes then formed an epoch; or at least obtained very general\ncredit. His fanciful vortices in nature, as well as his rigid\ndemonstration by reason, of that principle which is exalted above all\nreason, comprise rather the first germ of the various errors in the\nphysics and metaphysics of the succeeding age, than a sound basis of\ntrue science, and a Christian philosophy of the human mind. Spinoza\nwas the immediate disciple of Descartes, but it is in Germany alone\nthat his rationalist system of pantheism, expressed as it is in the\nforms of mathematical demonstration, and embellished by a morality\npure and noble, (at least in appearance and in its general outline,)\nhas been justly appreciated in its true metaphysical import, and has\nfound philosophic critics and imitators. But in its negative bearings,\nthe philosophy of Spinoza, together with other writings by that\ninquirer and others on and against revelation, had a very extensive\ninfluence in those times; and that philosophy forms the notable point\nof transition to the metaphysical speculations of our own age. Socinus\nhad directed his attacks against the great mystery in the existence of\nthe living God--the Christian dogma of the Trinity. In the system of\nSpinoza, philosophic Protestantism, or the progressive spirit of\nnegation, advanced one step further; for he denied the personal\nexistence, or the living personality of God, and endeavoured to\nsubstitute for the notion of the God-head the empty idea of the\nInfinite.\n\nOn the other hand, the systems of Bacon and Leibnitz were two\ndifferent foundations laid in that age for a higher and a better\nphilosophy--systems which by a more extensive developement and\nharmonious combination of their parts might have been moulded into a\nframe of phylosophy thoroughly Christian. Almost all the scientific\nlabours of Leibnitz were directed to this point, namely, the\ndemonstration, confirmation, and exemplification of the truths of\nChristianity, by the aid of science. The vast system of spiritualism,\nexalted far above all ideas of nature, which was propounded, or rather\nsketched out by Leibnitz, (with the exception of some peculiar\nopinions and mere hypotheses,) agrees perfectly with that purer\nPlatonism which all the Christian writers and fathers of the first\nages inculcated. And the fundamental principles of such a philosophy,\nif exposed in their native clearness and simplicity and without\nadventitious alloy, are the same which in their general spirit are to\nbe clearly traced, or are tacitly implied in the sacred Scriptures,\nwhose lofty purposes, however, rise far above the narrow forms and\nlimited sphere of philosophic investigation. How well Leibnitz\nunderstood and appreciated, and how far he subscribed to the truth of\nthe Catholic religion, has been brought to light in a singular manner\nin our own days;[12] and if we except some oversights, very pardonable\nunder all circumstances, his philosophic sketch of the Catholic system\nof theology, is in its masterly brevity one of the boldest and\nhappiest expositions of that religion, at least for the general\npurposes of the world. The other great celebrated philosophical system\nof modern times, was based in the principles of the philosophy of\nexperience--a system which has tended to enlarge almost immeasurably\nthe field of natural discoveries. As the founder of the philosophy of\nexperience--Bacon had conceived it, that philosophy, if we except some\nparticular defects and individual errors, is by no means at variance\nwith the Christian philosophy of Revelation; for the latter is in\nitself a philosophy of experience, though of another, higher, and\nspiritual kind. And it is the more necessary to keep this in view, as\notherwise the ordinary abyss of rationalism can scarcely be avoided.\nThe case is widely different when the principles of the empirical\nphilosophy, as in Locke and his followers, are directed against\neverything exalted, supernatural and spiritual in man and his\nconsciousness. By this important distinction, Bacon is an European\nphilosopher, like Leibnitz; but Locke is a mere English philosopher;\nas it was in England this Protestant philosophy sprang up and kept\npace with the Protestantism of state, engendered and nurtured by the\nConstitution of 1688. However, in England, the Protestant philosophy,\ntrue to its character, kept within the limits of a mitigated\nscepticism, and did not plunge into the same wild, revolutionary\nexcesses as the French philosophy of the eighteenth century, that\nstarted with the same principles.\n\nThe high intellectual cultivation of the English is by no means\nconfined to this negative philosophy, but is of a very peculiar\ncharacter, and like the British Constitution, combines in the most\nsingular manner the most heterogeneous elements. For although the\nBritish Constitution is generally considered as the fashionable model\nfor our times, and in one respect may indeed be so considered; yet a\npowerful aristocracy and many parts of the feudal constitution of the\nmiddle age, are there established in a sort of harmony, or at least\npermanent equipoise with the more modern elements of commerce and\ndemocracy. The heroic spirit of chivalry, and the whole moral\ncharacter of the middle age were long paramount in England; and hence\nin the poetry of no country, if we except the Spanish, is that spirit\nso conspicuous. The struggles between the houses of York and Lancaster\nduring the fifteenth century, which in the rugged and almost savage\nsternness of those heroic characters, bear no little resemblance to\nthe contests of the Guelfs and Ghibellines, form the heroic and\ntraditionary, though not very remote era of British history--an era\nwhich witnessed, too, the high military glory that England acquired in\nthe many battles and chivalrous engagements fought on the French soil.\nThe great national poet of England, who has taken the subject of many\nof his dramas from that glorious period of his country's annals,\nmaintains a sort of sceptical medium--a kind of poetical balance\nbetween the romantic enthusiasm of elder times, and the clear-sighted\npenetration of modern; and it is in this peculiar combination of\nqualities, that the originality of his genius, his unfathomable depth\nand high intellectual charm partly consist. As the Constitution of\nEngland--that is, the balance of her social institutions--sprang out\nof the old and mighty struggles which had convulsed that country; we\nmust not be surprised at finding in her higher poetry, which is only\nthe image and reflection of life, the same artificial union and\ncombination of the conflicting elements existing in her political\norganization. A profound analysis of art, conducted exclusively with\nthis view, and towards which the German mind has a strong and perhaps\nexcessive inclination, would be foreign to my present plan. To point\nout the traits of analogy existing between the productions of\nintellect, and the ages and nations to which they severally belong,\nmay serve to throw a clearer and more vivid light on important periods\nand momentous epochs of history; and it is with this view I have\nindulged now, as formerly, in short parallels of this kind. Down to\nthe most recent times, this marked predilection for the romantic world\nof the middle ages, and the chivalrous days, as well as the bold\ngenius of poets bursting through all vulgar trammels, have been the\ndistinctive character of English poetry, and have partly tended to\nmake it so great a favourite with all the nations of Europe.\n\nOn the other hand, the negative philosophy of the English remains true\nto its character, in as far as carefully shunning all objects of a\nhigher nature, it has for the most part made it a principle to limit\nits views entirely to man, without attempting to dive and penetrate\ninto the profound mysteries of the Deity, or into the internal secrets\nof nature. To this a high philosophy will object, man is no isolated\nbeing; but as he was originally placed by his Creator in nature, it is\nonly in that connexion with God and Nature, that the mysteries of his\ninward being, and the history of his outward progress can be fully\nunderstood and explained. In historical researches and narrations,\nwhen these are confined to special subjects and particular eras, and\ndo not attempt the more comprehensive plan of the Philosophy of\nHistory, that confined spirit of philosophic investigation which\nlimits its views exclusively to man, is not prejudicial; for on the\nother hand, the flexible powers of poetical genius (unless their\nactivity be cramped by the sceptical influence of a Protestant\nphilosophy), keep the mind alive to all high and generous qualities,\ncharacteristic peculiarities, and original greatness in men and\nevents. Hence that department of British literature which embraces\nhistoric research and narrative, is peculiarly fertile, and has met\nwith a general and European success.\n\nThe Protestantism of state, which was brought to maturity by the\nEnglish Constitution, was during the eighteenth century, when England\nheld generally the foremost rank among the nations, extended and\napplied in the system of the balance of power, to the whole Continent\nof Europe. But the Protestantism of science which originated there,\nformed together with the system of religious peace, the first\nfoundation of Illuminism; and denotes the whole period of its history\nfrom the commencement of the eighteenth century down to the French\nRevolution.\n\n     [11] The author here alludes to the history of the\n     Thirty years' war by Schiller.--_Trans._\n\n     [12] The author alludes to the Systema Theologicum of\n     Leibnitz, first published in Paris in the year 1819,\n     from the manuscript sent by the court of Prussia to\n     that of France. It was published by the Abbe Emery, who\n     accompanied the Latin original with a French\n     translation.--_Trans._\n\n\n\n\n                        END OF LECTURE XVI.\n\n\n\n\n                           LECTURE XVII.\n\n\n  Parallel between the religious peace of Germany and that of the\n    other countries of Europe.--The political system of the Balance\n    of Power, and the principle of false Illuminism prevalent in\n    the eighteenth century.\n\n\nThe great benefits of the religious peace of Germany, which founded\nupon, and springing out of a great historical necessity, has struck\nsuch deep roots in the public mind, and at last become a second nature\nto the Germans, may be best appreciated by a comparison with the state\nof religious liberty such as it now exists, or did recently exist\namong other nations--and those in truth which are in every other\nrespect the most civilized of modern Europe. In Germany, indeed, the\nstrict and vigilant maintenance of that religious peace, on which her\nwhole political existence depends, and without which she would fall\ninto an anarchic struggle of parties; has received in recent times a\nnew confirmation; and this religious peace, which has been revived,\nnot indeed in its old forms, but in its general spirit and essential\nimport, has become only the more necessary, as by the recent\npartitions of territories, a great intermixture of religions has been\nintroduced into states where formerly one religion only prevailed.\nThus in that state,[13] which was originally the greatest of all the\nProtestant states of Germany, and is now even still more powerful than\nformerly, a full half of the population is Catholic. Nearly to the\nsame extent, the same observation will apply, though inversely, to\nthat Catholic state[14] in Germany, which next to the Imperial state\nitself, is the greatest. So strongly has this Magna Charta[15] of the\nreligious liberty of Germany, (which scarcely needs any external\nsecurities, now that most of those securities no longer exist, or at\nleast have been very materially altered in the forms under which they\nformerly existed in the Confederation and in the Imperial courts of\nJudicature), so strongly, I say, has this Magna Charta taken root both\nin the public mind and state-policy of Germany, that the principle of\nreligious freedom no longer depends on the degree of population, or\nthe relation of numbers. Thus, for example, in the German Catholic\nprovinces of the Austrian Empire, the Protestants, though compared\nwith the rest of the population they form so very small a minority,\nhave been long in possession of the most unlimited religious freedom;\nand in the country[16] which was the very cradle of Protestantism, the\nfact that the royal dynasty and a very small minority of the nation\nprofess the Catholic religion, has been no obstacle to the most\ncordial, deep, and solid attachment on the part of the people to their\nold hereditary rulers--an attachment which has been evinced in the\nmost unequivocal and affecting manner by all classes of the nation at\nevery period of misfortune. If now we look to the other great states\nand civilized countries of Europe, which like Germany were involved\nfor a century and more in the turmoil of religious wars, and consider\nwhat issue these wars have had, what results they have produced, we\nshall find that in England civil war indeed no longer rages. But how\nthe relations between the Anglican church on the one hand, which force\nalone maintains in its political privileges and ascendancy, and the\nProtestant dissenters (who have a different character from those in\nGermany, or elsewhere, and are distinguished by a very violent\nsectarian spirit) and the Catholic population of Ireland, on the\nother; how these relations, I say, can be said to exhibit a state of\nreligious peace, I am at a loss to understand; for at no very remote\nperiod the latter country was the theatre of a bloody civil war. We\nmust at least allow that a solid and permanent internal peace, a\nperfect conciliation of minds, and an equitable adjustment of the\nrespective rights and claims of both parties, have apparently not yet\nbeen brought to a quiet and satisfactory issue. Nay, to judge from\nthose great parliamentary discussions in England, wherein not\nunfrequently and from passages the most obscure, and the least\nobserved by the superficial eye, the most secret motives, the deepest\nsprings of policy, and the most hidden thoughts and disquietudes of\nthe statesman come to light in that wonderful stage of public life; it\nwould appear that great self-apprehension reigned in the minds of\nEnglish politicians;--a fear which is the more likely to arise on\nevery serious retrospect that people take of the old abyss of their\ncivil contests; for more than any other nation, they are conversant\nwith their own annals, and have them ever before their eyes, and live\nin the past with all the intense feelings of the present. Hence every\nindividual among them knows full well that the fearful and fermenting\nelements of their great old civil commotion have never been perfectly\nappeased, and finally allayed, but have been merely repressed from\ntime to time, and prevented from breaking out anew by means of a\nConstitution, which on that account is reputed _glorious_. And\nmust not every Englishman ask himself the peremptory question, how a\ncountry can be, or be termed free, when its Catholic inhabitants,\namounting to a third part of its entire population, are doomed to\nundergo indescribable tyranny, and are in fact treated like a\nconquered nation?[17]\n\nIn France there prevails on matters of religion an indifference of\nfeeling, rather than any party contentions, or violent animosities, at\nleast among the greater part of the nation; and so long as the matter\nis not mixed up with political considerations, this feeling of\nindifference will bend to one opinion or to the other. Even in former\ntimes the religious wars, though violent enough, were not of so long\nand uninterrupted a duration and so widely destructive a nature, as in\nGermany, and comparatively speaking at least, were not attended with\nsuch frightful circumstances, as in England. But on the other hand,\nthey did not lead to those mighty, definite and permanent results,\nsuch as in Germany, a religious pacification--and in England, the\nestablishment of a free Constitution. And in the revocation of the\nedict of Nantes, accomplished in defiance of all antecedent promises,\nstipulations and rights, the victory of the Catholic majority of the\nnation, unjust in itself, was merely apparent and illusive, for all\nthe great problems of moral life remained unsolved, and the hostile\nand fermenting elements of Protestantism or a species of\nsemi-protestantism retained their full force; till a hundred years\nafter this arbitrary proceeding, an immense and formidable reaction\noccurred in the breaking out of the great Revolution. That grand\nconflict of the European nations which sprang out of this Revolution,\nand attended its whole course, must be looked upon in no other light\nthan as a religious war; for a formal separation not only from the\nchurch, but from all Christianity--a total abolition of the Christian\nreligion was an object of this Revolution which lasted nine years,\nbefore a sort of religious peace was established, by which it seemed\nto be acknowledged, that religion, for a time at least, was not an\nabsolutely superfluous want of the people; for the attempt of\ntheophilanthropy, or the public and legal establishment of a pure\nrationalist religion had no success. But as respected persons, this\npeace was not of long duration, as was but too soon apparent in the\nill-treatment and imprisonment of the head of the church. The drama of\nthe old Ghibelline times was renewed, and Ghibelline principles and\nmaxims of policy were openly avowed. If the military success of the\nFrench had been of longer continuance, these principles would have\nmade incomparably greater progress, and would have been more clearly\nunfolded, as there was a secret inclination to a certain Mahometan\njunction of civil and ecclesiastical power in the hands of the same\nperson. It could not, however, have escaped the keen perception of\nBuonaparte, how much the feelings and opinions of Europe, (whatever\nindifference it may manifest about religion, and however easily it\nmay give its sanction to encroachments on spiritual power, from want\nof knowledge or of interest in those matters,) are ever adverse to a\ncomplete and anti-christian fusion of secular and ecclesiastical\nauthority. That fanatic and destructive character which distinguished\nthe Revolutionary struggle in its origin, remained the same, though\nsomewhat modified in its form during the time of the Imperial\nconquests; and the general resistance of the nations of Europe, down\nto the final triumph of the Allies, retained to the last the character\nof a religious war, carried on in defence of all that was most sacred\nto humanity. Thus that great struggle must be considered as a\nfive-and-twenty years' religious war, or rather perhaps in its origin,\na war of irreligion, though it is not worth while to dispute about a\nword. For this reason, in the country where this mighty Revolution had\nits birth, the restoration of monarchy is inseparably connected with\nthat of religion; and it is by a religious regeneration, that the\nstatesmen of that kingdom, who are well-wishers to their country, and\nhave in view its permanent well-being, and not the idle and transient\nsplendour of military glory, should endeavour to secure the future\ndestinies of France.\n\nThis universal and convulsive crisis of the world in latter times, now\nthat it has happily and entirely passed by, has created a mighty\nchasm, and thrown up a wall of separation between the present age and\nthe eighteenth century. Now that the conflict is over, and all the\nillusions incident to that state of struggle have passed away, the\neighteenth century, which bore that great Revolution in its womb, and\nat last brought it into life, can be judged with greater impartiality\nand historic freedom, and better understood, and more duly appreciated\nin all its comprehensive bearings. For during the existence of any\nstruggle, it is apparently given to few mortals to form respecting\npassing events a judgment which can be truly termed historical; as in\ngeneral, a certain distance of time is requisite to the formation of\njust and accurate opinions. In this last section of universal history,\nit would be idle and superfluous to enter into a minute detail of\nfacts so generally known. It is on that account the more important for\nthe due illustration and philosophic investigation of a period so near\nto us, briefly to point out amid the multitude of well-known facts,\nthe leading and determining causes of all the events which occurred.\nThe leading and stirring principles of all occurrences and enterprises\nin the eighteenth century, as the history of that age abundantly\nproves, may be traced on the one hand, to the system of the Balance of\nPower in the internal government and outward relations of states; and\non the other, to the principle of illuminism in the department of\nmorals, though this principle was not confined to the sphere of mind,\nbut exerted a great practical influence on real life, and finally\nbrought about a total revolution in the state. Both these\nprinciples--the system of the balance of power, which was the\nprotestantism of state--and the principle of illuminism, which from\nits negative character, agreed in the main with the Protestantism of\nphilosophy, and was only a natural consequence of that philosophy,--had\ntheir origin chiefly in England, and there first, or more than\nelsewhere, reached their development. For from the commencement of the\neighteenth century down to the mighty Revolution which closed it,\nEngland was the state that took the lead in every occurrence and\ntransaction, gave the tone to the age, and formed the strong central\nlever to the system of the Balance of Power. The plan of such a system\nhad indeed been openly avowed several centuries before, and had been\nacted upon as a principle in many political enterprises and\nnegotiations; but the then existing circumstances of the world, which\nrequired and admitted of a far higher law of adjudication, confined\nthe operation of this principle within very narrow limits. Thus it was\na far higher principle of Christian equity, which constituted the\nbasis of the holy Roman Empire of Germany in the middle age; and it\nwas only when that empire had been weakened and undermined by various\nshocks, external and internal, that the system of the Balance of Power\nbegan towards the latter part of the fifteenth century, to exert a\ncommanding influence. Italy was in general the theatre and arena for\nthe workings of that policy; Spain, France, and Austria, next Venice,\nthe Pope, and Switzerland, the active agents in that changeful\nstruggle; and Naples and Lombardy the subject of dispute, and the\nprize of contention. But when the progress and success of the Turkish\narms from without, and the formidable, growing and fermenting elements\nof religious strife from within, had threatened Europe with total\nruin, or at least with the most formidable danger, the new, inferior\nprinciple of policy was compelled to yield to the urgent necessities\nof the times, and to old opinions not yet totally extinct. Men felt\nthe absolute want of an Emperor and general Protector of Christendom,\ninvested as in ancient times, with power really adequate to his\ndignity; and this was the motive which led to the election of the\nEmperor Charles V. The extent of his empire, however, made his power\nappear greater than it was in reality. If a decided and formidable\npreponderance of power existed any where, we must look for it on the\nside of the Turks, whose triumphant arms brought them ever nearer\ntowards Europe, and whose progress Charles was little able to arrest.\nFrance, situated as she was in the centre of Europe, had nothing to\napprehend from the Turks, while she was sufficiently strong and\npowerful to disregard danger from any quarter. Her rivalry with Spain,\nand her perpetual wars with the Emperor, were exceedingly injurious to\nEurope, as they cramped and impeded all the operations of the emperor\nin behalf of Christendom, and all his exertions for providing for its\nexternal and internal security. But to no country were those wars more\nhurtful than to France herself, which had need of all her energies for\nthe maintenance of internal tranquillity, in order by her undivided\nactivity, to be able to allay and settle the various elements of\nreligious strife, which afterwards broke out with such fearful\nviolence. At that period, and even during the seventeenth century, the\nwars of Turkey were generally considered as religious wars, partly\nfrom the dreadful consequences which ensued to the Christian religion\nin the conquered countries, where if it were not entirely extirpated,\nit was at least doomed to the severest oppression; and partly from the\nfanatic and sanguinary character of those wars themselves. The\nalliances which France during the religious wars of the seventeenth\ncentury, and contrary to the interests of her own creed, entered into\nwith Sweden and Turkey, under pretence of maintaining the Balance of\nPower, were more than anything else prejudicial to the Catholic cause,\ninflicted a deep wound on Christian principles, and contributed much\nto mislead the opinion of the age. The final result of this policy was\nthe establishment of a decided preponderance on the part of France,\ntowards the end of the seventeenth century--a preponderance which then\nat least must be ascribed to Lewis XIV. only.\n\nNow that the religious wars were terminated, this appeared the period\nproper for the establishment of the system of the Balance of Power--a\nsystem which must ever be called into action, when every higher\nprinciple of international adjudication has ceased to be\napplicable--and which, as it was the source whence had emanated the\nwhole moral and intellectual culture of the eighteenth century,\nattained now a more systematic form, and held a more brilliant and\ndignified place, than at any former period of history. England was the\nstrong, central prop of the great lever for the European Balance of\nPower, while Austria, which in every age has been true to a pacific\nsystem of policy, (although her moral existence depended on far higher\nprinciples of religion), formed on the Continent the other main stay\nto the system of the Balance of Power, now become the universal\nprinciple of international policy. And this firm alliance between the\ntwo powers was in general, the external basis of this system,\nindependently of the many fluctuations which were inherent to its very\nnature. We must not however confound this principle of policy with a\nconservative and pacific system, acting according to existing and\nacknowledged rights; for although the former system be much akin to\nthe latter, and both may easily and naturally co-operate in a common\nresistance to an overgrown power, regardless of all right; still they\nare far from being one and the same; and differ widely in many\ncharacteristic properties, nay in their very nature. The fundamental\nlaw of the conservative and pacific policy is Right--not an abstract\nnotion and pure ideal of absolute justice, by which the international\npolicy of states is to be fashioned and regulated; but rather (if for\nthe sake of greater clearness I may be allowed the use of a\nmathematical phrase) an applied right, that is to say, an existing and\nacknowledged right. For if we seek the first origin and ultimate\nfoundation of all right and all justice, we must seek it in God alone,\nwho is the eternal arbiter of the world, of states and nations as well\nas of individuals, and who well knows how to requite every great\npolitical injustice on his appointed day of retribution, to visit it\nwith unexpected punishment, and to reduce it to its own nothingness by\nan often fearful award. But so soon as man, or any earthly power\npresumes to lay its hand upon this work--to propose to itself absolute\njustice, to judge and regulate all things by that standard, and to\nmodel the world in conformity to it--the consequence is a total\nRevolution in all the relations of society--an entire subversion of\nall existing order; and it is this false idea which is the principle\nor the pretext of all those fanatic attempts at universal conquest,\nand of every Revolution not directed to the attainment of specific\nrights, but aiming at sweeping, unqualified and universal change. It\nis only when in the general system of existing and positive\ninternational rights, some occurrence has produced a chasm--some\ninterstice appears--some particular question remains, or becomes anew,\nopen and debateable ground--that a pacific policy acting on the\nprinciple I have mentioned, can and will in such special cases, revert\nto the original, pure and eternal justice of God. But in the material\nsystem of the Balance of Power, right and wrong are not the ultimate\nobject, nor the sole criterion of political estimation, nor the sole\nrule of political negociations; but the great object is the prevention\nor removal of any ascendancy which endangers or even threatens danger\nto the general interests of the powers. Both systems of policy may\nvery well concur in their effects, and in most cases really do concur,\nfor the establishment of political ascendancy is generally founded on\nthe violation of existing rights, or may easily lead thereto. But this\nis not absolutely necessary; cases may easily be conceived where right\nis clearly on the side of ascendant might, as was once the case in the\nmiddle of the eighteenth century, and as happened in another way\ntowards the beginning of the same age, when the cause of justice was\nespoused by preponderant power only. And in such cases, with a total\ndisregard to justice, this system of the material Balance of Power\nwill fling its weight into the opposing scale, in order to impede the\nprogress of overgrown dominion. In another respect, also, the\ncharacter and ordinary tendency of this system differ widely from that\npacific policy, which aims at the preservation of all existing and\nacknowledged rights. In the latter system, it is only the actual\ndisturbance and real violation of the general peace of nations, which\ncan lead to the declaration of war. But on the contrary, in the former\nsystem it is merely a formidable preponderance of power--a mere\npossibility of its abuse--a dread of future danger, which is deemed a\nsufficient motive for engaging in hostilities--a motive by which a\nstate, where this is the exclusive principle of policy, is\nundoubtedly, as has often been objected to England, more easily and\nmore quickly determined, than any other: and such a motive may operate\nthe more easily in a country like England, where those inducements for\nentering into war with more haste than is expedient or desirable, are\nstrengthened by the fact, that an insular and naval state,\nconcentrated within itself, can carry on hostilities with all the\nadvantages of peace, and with the wonted activity of trade. England\nduring the eighteenth century acquired the highest glory, and in\ngeneral made a very beneficial use of her great power, in contributing\nto the general aid, security and freedom of Europe; and in what is\nhere said, it is by no means intended to cast a slur on, or to\nundervalue the old and well-acquired power of Great Britain, as such a\ncensure would be futile in itself, and extremely misplaced here. But\nfor the right understanding of the peculiar political character and\ntendencies of an age, like the eighteenth century, so near to our own\ntimes, it is necessary to observe that the system of the Balance of\nPower is either merely the substitute for a higher principle, where\nthe latter is no longer susceptible of application, or in those cases\nwhere the latter hath really force, the system of the Balance of Power\nmust be considered a mere supplement--a subordinate auxiliary for the\nsettlement of incidental questions. But with the great Revolution\nwhich closed the eighteenth century, there commenced an epoch of\nintellectual as well as political barbarism and desolation, to which\nthe mere negative principle of an equilibrium of power, however it\nmight be adequate to the ordinary relations of civilized states, was\nno longer applicable; for now a higher principle of moral and social\nreparation was needed. In no department of human activity can the\npositive power of evil be overcome by a mere negative principle of\nresistance, but solely by a principle of a homogeneous, though loftier\nnature--a divine power acting within the same circle. A mighty\nreligious war, which has shaken all moral existence to its centre, and\nconvulsed it in all its depths, can be completely terminated only by a\ntrue religious peace. But such a peace depends on the moral force of\nprinciple, and not on the exact measurement of any physical\nequilibrium. As during the late frightful Revolution, the political\nrelations of every state have been changed, and the whole Balance of\nPower in Europe been disturbed, no force can now easily alter or\nreplace what has thus been established. Of this, England herself may\nafford us an example. Certainly that great country in Southern\nAsia--the richest of all the countries in the world--and which Great\nBritain has annexed to her sway, by means of a navy that gives her the\nempire of the seas, and whose population five or six times exceeds\nthat of the ocean-queen, and equals in numbers the best half of\nEurope; has brought an accession of strength to England, which can not\npossibly be measured, judged, or condemned according to the old narrow\nrules of the system of the Balance of Power; since so many vast and\nimportant results have accrued, and in all probability will yet accrue\nto Europe and India herself from this most singular, and in the\nhistory of the world, quite unprecedented connection; and since in\nother respects, not only the internal administration of Hindostan, but\nthe entire conduct of the English in those transactions, has been at\nonce so wise and glorious. As the shallow, superficial notion of\nilluminism, which during the greater part of the eighteenth century\nwas considered the all-ruling principle and highest object of all\nscience and speculation, is no longer adequate to the present views of\nphilosophy; in like manner the system of the Balance of Power has\nceased to be any longer applicable to the state of Europe in the late\ngeneral warfare, or to that state of things which it has given rise\nto; and it is not from this system we can expect the final settlement\nand adjustment of things, and the solution of the Gordian knot--the\ngreat enigma of the world in our times.\n\nAfter the system of the Balance of Power, the next leading and\ncharacteristic principle in the history of the eighteenth century, is\nthe notion of illuminism, which exercised on the internal civilization\nof all European nations the same influence which the former system\nexerted on their external relations. People are so accustomed to\nconfound the principle of enlightenment with the abuse and false\napplication made of it during the last century, that in order to\nrepresent this great epoch in all its historical bearings, I shall\nendeavour to shew that to an impartial judge and observer, it offers\nmany and diverse points for consideration. For we must remember that\nthere was a true enlightenment by the side of a false one, and that\nenlightenment was not every where of a negative character, precipitate\nin its progress, and destructive in its effects. In its first obscure\nbeginnings, it had a solid, irreproachable, and very beneficial\ncharacter and tendency. During the public calamities, and general\nanarchy of the seventeenth century, the natural sciences in all their\nvarious branches, made silent but very extraordinary progress; and\nnumberless were the advantages of these new discoveries to all the\nuseful arts and sciences, especially in those commercial and maritime\nstates where such knowledge was mostly needed. A bold, enterprising\ngenius,[18] heir to the most splendid throne in the North, had as an\napprentice and artisan appropriated on the spot all these advantages\nof modern civilization, and turned them to full account in navigation,\nin the various mechanic arts, in the foundation of cities, and in the\ngeneral civilization of his subjects; and thus he became the founder\nof the present greatness of Russia;--a greatness which is built on a\nspecies of enlightenment, that so far from being of a futile and rash\nnature, and of a destructive tendency, has exerted a gradual but\nbeneficial influence over the whole extent of an empire, which\nstretches far into two continents of the globe. It was only by that\ntrue and genuine improvement and civilization, which commenced under\nPeter the Great, that Russia acquired the knowledge and mastery of her\nown resources, and thus rose to a high and permanent grade in the\nscale of nations.\n\nThe separation of the Russian church from the authority of the Greek\npatriarch, who had now fallen under Turkish dependance, appeared a\nnecessary condition for opening a door in Russia to the moral and\nintellectual civilization of Europe; nor when we consider that such a\nstep was but the continuation of an original schism, can we deem it a\nsubject of blame. It does not appear, however, that the system of a\n_national church_, which has sprung out of this separation, has\nbeen here as much abused as in the Anglican church, or in that system\nof anti-papal opposition nearly akin to it, adopted in one or more\nCatholic countries of Europe. The very system, however, of an\nexclusively national religion, must ever be an object of the greatest\nsolicitude, for it is but too easily susceptible of an extension most\nfatal to Christian government, which nothing so much impairs and\nundermines as any leaning to the Mahometan confusion of spiritual and\ntemporal power in the hands of the same person.\n\nMen have often blamed that harsh junction of opposites observable in\nthe sudden and artificial civilization of Russia; that is to say, the\ncontrast which there exists between the highest intellectual luxury,\nand the most exquisite and fashionable refinement in thought and\nmanners among the higher classes, at the court and in the capital, and\nthe very low grade of civilization, the state of utter or at least\nsemi-barbarism, to which so large a portion of the population are\nreduced. But no very prejudicial effects have resulted to society in\nRussia, from this conjunction of elements, and from the obstacles\nwhich so many vast masses have opposed to the progress of\ncivilization; and even that hurry and precipitancy in the career of\nenlightenment, which was the great fault of almost all other European\ncountries, was by this means avoided, or rather prevented by the very\nnature of things. The only thing here to be apprehended and guarded\nagainst was this, that in copying the civilization of Europe, Russia\nshould not introduce along with it those negative and destructive\nprinciples--those maxims of liberalism and irreligion which were\nalmost exclusively prevalent in European literature and science during\nthe eighteenth century; in a word that Protestantism, (in the wide and\ncomprehensive signification of that term,) should not become too\npredominant in the public mind.\n\nThe first ground-work of the modern civilization of Russia, as laid\ndown by Peter the Great, was of a thoroughly practical nature,\ndirected in part to objects of commercial utility, after the manner of\nthe Dutch and English. The moral corruption occasioned by the French\nphilosophy introduced under Catherine II., was confined to a small\ncircle; and in the course of succeeding times, this philosophy came to\nbe considered as an exotic element of destruction, which so far from\nbeing adequate to the exigencies of the age, struck at the very root\nof society. In a more recent period, liberal and Revolutionary\ntheories of government, copied from constitutional countries, may at\nmost have led to a criminal enterprise; but have not exercised any the\nleast permanent influence on the bulk of the nation. But the great and\nessential point for this European and Asiatic Empire,--the seat of a\nprogressive enlightenment,--as well as for the rest of Europe, is\nstill this--that this enlightenment, which is the basis on which this\nempire is founded, should never take an irreligious course, but should\never maintain a decidedly religious character. And in this respect\nmore than any other, a generous monarch[19] who became great in the\nschool of adversity, must be considered as the second founder of\nRussian greatness, because he has stamped on this empire a strong,\npermanent religious impress. I do not allude here of course to any\nfanatic measure of coercion, but to the moral influence of\nreligion--to its firm establishment as the general principle of\nEuropean government in the present times.\n\nThe principle of illuminism, when properly conceived, has nothing at\nall reprehensible in itself, or at variance with the Christian\nreligion. In the same way that Christianity, if not only its dogmas\nwere developed, but its general influence extended, and made\ntriumphant in the world, would soon supplant the existing human\nReformation, and be the true, the divine reformation of mankind, of\nthe world, and even of the visible creation; so it is itself the true\nillumination, whereof Holy Writ speaketh: it is that light of eternal\nlight, which was in the beginning, and which was the life of men, (as\nthe words from the mouth of eternal Truth declare,) and in which men\nare once more to find their life. But to descend from this lofty idea\ninto the world of historical experience, we should carefully\ndistinguish between a true, lasting, and vivifying illumination, and a\nfalse, mimic, and illusive species of enlightenment. One thing is the\nwarm, genial light of the sun returning to the new-born spring, or the\nfresh glow of morning after the lengthened night--and another the\ntransient glimmer of a bonfire, which after exciting a false alarm,\nsinks rapidly again into darkness. One thing is the solitary midnight\nlamp of silent meditation--and another the lightning which flashes\nathwart the gloomy heavens, or the dark lantern of the murderer\nstealing his way along in the night, or the torchlight in the robbers'\ncave, where the spoil is divided, and new misdeeds are concerted.\n\nFor all these various significations of true and false illumination,\nthe eighteenth century in its real or pretended enlightenment may\nfurnish us with historical proofs. Thus without misapprehending or\ndisowning that true and divine light visible even in the progress of\nscience, or without rejecting, or contracting in too narrow bounds the\nsalutary and necessary light of human reason, still we must be careful\nto distinguish from the former the light which is illusive, or\nchangeable, as well as that which is spurious, and counterfeited by\nthe powers of darkness.\n\nIn this consists the sign of a false enlightenment--if not merely in\nits origin, and in its outward effects, but in its own nature as well\nas undeviating course, it retains a negative character, and is\ntherefore hollow and superficial. But any system which is originally\ndestitute of a firm and solid foundation, may easily be driven into an\nirregular and devious, and ultimately into a most fatal course. This\nis in short the essential distinction observable in the progress of a\ngenuine and a spurious species of enlightenment. This illuminism\nexercised so general an influence in the eighteenth century on church\nand state, on science and on social life, on the relations of policy\nand the course of public events, that even Spain and the Papal\nterritories were not exempt from its influence--an influence which was\nperceptible on the one hand, in many useful reforms in the internal\nadministration of those states--and on the other hand, in the\nexpulsion of the Jesuits, which was first commenced by Portugal and\nSpain, and to which the jealousy of other religious orders had\ncontributed. But the whole transaction must be ascribed to a\ndestructive party of Illuminati, that had secretly grown up in those\ncountries, and now expanded to public view, and appeared in full\npower. To such a party those religious orders which had fallen into a\nstate of real degeneracy, inactivity, and ignorance, so far from being\nobjects of hatred, were exceedingly welcome for the promotion of their\nsecret views. But not so an order, which was distinguished for its\nzeal and activity, its devotion to the interests of the church, its\nscientific acquirements, and knowledge of the world. A critical\nenquiry into the truth or falsehood of the several charges and\naccusations against the Jesuits, must be reserved to a special history\nof those countries I have named, or to a particular history of the\norder. But their expulsion is here mentioned, as it is a very\ncharacteristic circumstance in the history of that age of pretended\nillumination. It may be generally thought that the determination which\nPope Ganganelli at last came to for the suppression of the order, was\nextorted from him by the overruling influence of the secular powers.\nBut if such a supposition be really admissible, it is evident on the\nother hand, that the restoration of the order was effected by the\nvirtuous Pontiff who ruled the church in the late period of\noppression, at the very moment when the iron yoke of military\ndespotism weighed heaviest on the nations of Europe.\n\nThe true progress of Christian enlightenment in the pursuits of\nphilosophy and science, I shall have occasion to mention afterwards.\nThe principle of toleration, which was solidly established by the\nGerman treaty of religious peace, became an essential element of\nsocial illumination. By degrees this principle was admitted throughout\nalmost all Europe--yet we must observe that its adoption cannot be\ndetermined by one uniform, invariable rule in all countries, but that\nlocal circumstances, respecting which it is often difficult for the\ndistant observer to come to a right judgment, must and ought to\nproduce numerous modifications in the application of the principle.\nThat wide toleration which in Holland and North America has for a long\ntime incorporated into the state a multitude of petty sects, would\nnot be practicable or expedient in other countries. The religious\nliberty which in the Russian Empire is extended even to Mahometans,\nand to certain tribes of Buddhists and Pagans, would not apply to the\ncircumstances of most other civilized countries. There are in the\ndeep-rooted habits of nations, and in the constitution of individual\nstates, very peculiar, and often apparently singular, circumstances\nand combinations, which no man should judge of hastily, and according\nto abstract principles, until he has obtained a close, accurate, and\ndeep insight into the historical condition and situation of a country.\nThus while England is intolerant in her Constitution at home, she\ngives the fullest latitude in Canada to the North American principle\nof religious freedom; and the whole British Empire in India is founded\non toleration--that is to say, on the principle of governing the\nIndians according to their own laws, manners, customs, and opinions.\nBy this policy the English have become almost complete masters of this\ngreat and fertile country; and their enlightened rule forms a strong\ncontrast to the earlier tyranny of the Mahometans, who hold the Indian\nidolatry in the utmost abhorrence; although that idolatry, amid a\nchaos of errors and fables, contains many better and higher vestiges\nof ancient truth, than the mere negative and fanatic superstition of\nMahomet. Even the French, when they had a firm footing in India,\ncommitted a capital fault in forming alliances more with the\nMahometans than with the native Indian powers.\n\nIn Europe, Norway alone, among the Protestant states, has maintained\ndown to our times laws of severe exclusion against every religion\ndiffering from the established one--an exclusion which extends as well\nto Jews as to Catholics; while Spain and Portugal only, among Catholic\ncountries, offer an example of similar intolerance. To abolish\nsuddenly without urgent and overpowering reasons, or some new\nhistorical emergency, laws which have thus grown out of the general\ncircumstances of a country, which have existed for ages, and have\ntaken deep root in the manners and habits of life, provokes suspicion,\nand may occasion danger. But we must not suppose that a severe and\nexclusive system of legislation, like that existing in Spain, can\nalways counteract the occult and far more dangerous opposition of\nsecret sects and societies. This might be proved, or rendered probable\nby many facts in the history of those countries during the eighteenth\ncentury. In Italy this rigid and exclusive legislation was never\ncarried to the same unqualified extent. Intolerance there never\nextended to the Jews, nor to the Greek schismatics, and in recent\ntimes it does not, as formerly, affect the Protestants. In Germany,\ntoleration was legally established by the treaty of Westphalia, and\nthere the cause of toleration stood in no need of the modern principle\nof illuminism--the all-stirring and animating principle of the\neighteenth century. But here illuminism in its first negative period\nwas directed against prejudices and abuses of another kind. In certain\nProtestant countries in the North of Germany, this period of\nillumination dates from the abolition of trials for witchcraft. And\nagainst so modest a beginning not the slightest objection could be\nurged; for in general the criminal law which the later and already\ndegenerate middle age bequeathed to modern times, afforded ample scope\nfor amelioration, and contained many barbarous edicts that deserved to\nbe abolished. The use of torture, and of un-christian and excruciating\nmodes of execution, were next the objects of Reform. The total\nabolition of capital punishment, which this legal Reform soon aimed at\nin its ulterior progress, the experience of mankind has not yet found\nto be either possible or practicable. Who will be disposed to deny\nthat the many abuses which were now corrected, and the many vulgar\nprejudices which were refuted or done away with, were especially at\nthe outset, in a great measure such as were truly deserving of that\nname, and that very many of those reforms were useful and necessary,\njust and wholesome. It appears, however, sometimes, that barbarous\nabuses thus hastily and precipitately removed, soon reappear under\nother forms and denominations. This may easily be the case, where\nthose useful and necessary reforms are confined to the outward\nsurface, and do not penetrate to the roots, and internal essence of\nthings.--It is worthy of remark, that in the absence of solid and\npositive principles, the mere removal of abuses--a mere negative\ncourse of conduct, will never alone attain the desired end, nor is it\nin itself always safe and certain. Soon a rash and passionate\nprecipitancy will be apparent in the conduct of affairs--the standard\nand real term of our exertions will be lost sight of, and things will\nfall into a ruinous course; and such is the character of that period\nof transition from the age of illuminism to the time of the French\nRevolution. Was there a single object, not only in the questions\nrelating to humanity, but in the whole department of public life and\ngeneral belief, in religion and in government, which was not soon\nregarded as a prejudice or an abuse?\n\nIn Germany, when the Empress Maria Theresa ascended the Imperial\nthrone, the long established peace of the empire, which it had once\ncost such efforts to secure and preserve, appeared to the new school\nof philosophy, a ridiculous prejudice of unenlightened, pedantic\nBurghers of state. But fifty years afterwards, during the atheistic\nand revolutionary period of the French philosophy, immediately prior\nto the French Revolution, as well as at its commencement,\nChristianity, and in fact all religion, was considered as a mere\nprejudice of the infancy of the human mind, totally destitute of\nfoundation in truth, and no longer adapted to the spirit of the age;\nmonarchy and the whole civilization of modern Europe as abuses no\nlonger to be tolerated. It was only when men had reached this extreme\nterm of their boasted enlightenment, that a re-action took place. But\nprior to this, towards the middle of the eighteenth century, and in\nthe ten years immediatedly subsequent, the spirit of the age bore all\nbefore it in its irresistible progress. As in ancient times, monarchs\nhad competed for the title of Most Christian, or Most Catholic, so now\nthe potentates pre-eminent for power and understanding, were flattered\nby the title of enlightened. It is not without a great shock to our\nfeelings, we contemplate the close intimacy which subsisted between a\nmonarch grown grey in the toils of war and the cares of state, a\npowerful Empress of a Northern court, and the most depraved champions\nof French infidelity. With respect to the third of those eminent\npotentates of the age of illuminism, Joseph II., it has never been\ndenied by those most competent to form a correct opinion on this\nsubject, that among the various measures and regulations passed in the\nshort reign of that active emperor, although some are not entitled to\nthe same praise, yet many were really adapted to the exigencies of the\nage, and have been attended with the most beneficial consequences to\nindustry and to intellectual cultivation. But the serious turn which\nthings afterwards took, the universal convulsion, and remodelling of\nthe world, have long fully demonstrated, that not one or two only, but\nmany of the most active and enlightened sovereigns of that age,\nyielded far too much to the prevailing principles of the time, and\nfollowed too readily the spirit of that age in its wild, rapid, and\nall-destructive career.\n\nTo the many elements of internal ferment already existing in France,\nthe imitation of English manners under the Regent, which was soon\nsucceeded by an imitation of English literature and philosophy, added\na source of equal danger. For to maintain within certain prescribed\nlimits this English philosophy that reduces everything to the\nexperience of sensation, the French wanted that sense of equilibrium\ninnate in the English, and which their constitution had rendered\nalmost instinctive to them; and by means of which in philosophy, as in\ntheir internal government, and in their relations with Foreign states,\nthey can keep within bounds; and with them a philosophy, however\nunspiritual and ungodly, does not so rapidly rush into a headlong and\ndestructive course, as it did in France and in Europe during the\natheistical and revolutionary period of literature and science; for\nthe deadly influence of this spirit was not confined to France--the\nland of its birth--but spread over every country. This is the\nimportant and essential distinction between the philosophy of Locke or\nof Hume for example, which I before designated as the Protestantism of\nphilosophy, in opposition to the thoroughly revolutionary philosophy\nof French atheism--for though the former by its opposition to all\nspiritual ideas is of a negative character, yet most of its partisans\nand champions contrive to make some sort of capitulation with divine\nfaith, and to preserve a kind of belief in moral feeling. The French\nphilosophy was in fact a new Pagan idolatry of nature, and even the\nmost splendid discoveries of natural science, which might and ought to\nhave pointed to a higher principle, were not contemplated in their\ntrue spirit, nor employed to proper advantage, but were even made the\ninstruments of a fanatic hostility towards the Deity. Even among the\ncomparatively better natural philosophers of France, materialism was\ntoo generally the basis of their science, and a sensual enthusiasm for\nnature too much the prevailing tone of their writings.\n\nThe more brilliant the talents which led the way in this new impious\nand Revolutionary career of the European mind, the more generally\npernicious was the result. Such was the case with that scoffer, whose\ngenius could adapt itself to all the forms, moods, and styles of the\nold French literature, and who wielding, as he did, with so masterly a\nhand the weapon of a lawless wit, directed it without intermission\nduring his whole life against everything holy and venerable, of what\nnature and kind soever. As those errors are the most dangerous, which\nas containing a portion of truth, carry with them a greater power of\nconviction; so Rousseau has perhaps exercised a more fatal influence\nthan that other spirit, who with his mockery polluted all things. We\ncannot precisely term him un-christian--at least such an epithet\ncannot be applied to him in the same unqualified and universal\nextent--and when compared with the Atomical philosophy and the\nAtheistical idolatry of nature, his fanatic worship of nature will be\nfound of a more spiritual cast. The great eloquence of this man\nentitles him perhaps as clearly to the first rank among the orators of\nhis nation during the eighteenth century, as Bossuet with very\ndifferent religious principles holds in his own age. Eloquence less\npowerful than Rousseau's could not well have sufficed to draw his age\ninto an admiration for that savage equality which he preached up--to\nhave excited its enthusiasm for the state of the Caribees and the\nIroquois, which, looking back with regret to man's original happiness\nin the pure freedom of nature, he represented as his proper destiny,\nutterly marred as he was, by European civilization. This was not a\nmere idle freak of imagination, such as any false enchantment of\nromance might display--but Rousseau endeavoured to demonstrate with\nall the rigid deductions of mathematical proof, the happy equality of\nthe savage state; and with the most earnest conviction and blind\nfanaticism, his system was applied to the actual relations of life.\nThe result was that period of godless freedom--freedom separated from\nGod and from every divine principle whether of conduct or belief, and\nwhich, as usual, was soon succeeded by the false unity of a crushing\ndespotism, equally hostile to every heavenly and exalted motive of\nhuman action. But such has been the frightfully accelerated march of\nevents in these latter times, that the former stages of the\nRevolutionary course in ancient Rome--the attempt of the elder\nBrutus--the establishment of a Republic--the wars with the rival\nCarthage--the rapid career of military conquests--and the transition\nto despotism, down to Tiberius or Dioclesian--have been here traversed\nin the short period of scarcely one generation. It would be unjust\nalways to term this the French Revolution, or to consider it\nexclusively as such--it was a general political malady--an universal\nepidemic of the age. In Holland and Belgium a Revolution had\npreviously broken out--the Polish Revolution occurred about the same\ntime; but though the Belgian, and more particularly the Polish\nRevolutions were of a totally different character from the French,\nthey still presented to the turbulent spirit of the age, one example\nmore of political commotion. But North America had been to France and\nthe rest of Europe, the real school and nursery of all these\nRevolutionary principles. Natural contagion, or wilful propagation\nspread this disorder over many other countries--but France continued\nto be the centre and general focus of Revolution.\n\nEven when the whole power of the Revolution had been concentrated in\nthe person of a single man, its general march was not materially\nchanged. With respect to Foreign states and countries, the French\nRevolution produced a protracted religious war of twenty-one years;\nfor it was such not only from its origin, but from its Revolutionary\nand destructive character, and from its fanatic opposition to\neverything holy. There was a fixed principle at the bottom of this\nmodern Paganism. It was political idolatry--and it matters little what\nmay be the immediate object of this idolatry--what the idol of the\nday, whether a Republic and the goddess of reason--the grande\nnation--or the lust of conquest and the glory of arms. It is still the\nsame demon of political destruction--the same anti-Christian spirit of\ngovernment, which wishes to mislead the age, and control the world.\nThe great religious war, which has desolated all Europe, can be\nfinally terminated only by a new and general religious peace:--but the\ngreat gulph of perdition to our age is that political idolatry,\nwhatever shape it may assume--whatever name it may bear. Until that\nidolatry be abolished, until that abyss of ruin be closed up, the\nhouse of the Lord, where peace and righteousness embrace each other,\ncan never be founded on a renovated earth.\n\n     [13] Prussia.\n\n     [14] Bavaria.\n\n     [15] The Treaty of Westphalia.\n\n     [16] Saxony.\n\n     [17] The passing of the Catholic Relief Bill has\n     happily rendered this observation obsolete.--_Trans._\n\n     [18] Peter the Great.\n\n     [19] The late Emperor Alexander.\n\n\n\n\n                        END OF LECTURE XVII.\n\n\n\n\n                           LECTURE XVIII.\n\n\n  On the general spirit of the age, and on the universal\n    Regeneration of Society.\n\n             \"I come soon, and will renew all things.\"\n\n\nThere are in the history of the eighteenth century, many phenomena\nwhich occurred so suddenly, so instantaneously, so contrary to all\nexpectation, that although on deeper consideration we may discover\ntheir efficient causes in the past, in the natural state of things,\nand in the general situation of the world, yet are there many\ncircumstances which prove that there was a deliberate, though secret,\npreparation of events, as, indeed, in many instances has been actually\ndemonstrated. I must now say a few words on this secret and mysterious\nbranch of Illuminism, and on the progress it made during the period of\nits sway, in order to complete the sketch of that period, and to shew\nthe influence of this principle, both in regard to the origin and\ngeneral spirit of the Revolution, (which in its fanaticism believed\nitself a regeneration of the world), and in regard to the true\nrestoration of society founded on the basis of Christian justice. But\nthere is this peculiar circumstance in this historical enquiry, that\nthose who as eye-witnesses could best speak from their personal\nexperience, cannot always be considered the most credible vouchers;\nfor we never know, or can know what their particular views and\ninterests may lead them to say or conceal, to suppress wholly or in\npart. However it has so happened, that in the universal convulsion and\noverthrow of society, many things have come to light on this\nmysterious and esoteric clue in modern history--things which when\ncombined together, furnish us with a not incorrect, and a tolerably\ncomplete idea of this mighty element of the Revolution, and of\nIlluminism both true and false, which has exercised so evident and\nvarious an influence on the world. And it is only on such historical\ngrounds (which are quite sufficient for our purpose, and can alone be\nmade the matter of consideration here), I am at all competent to\npronounce an opinion on this subject, or, as I should rather say, to\ngive an account of this event; and it is from historical sources,\nreferences and facts alone, that the following sketch has been taken.\n\nAs to the origin of this esoteric influence, the impartial historical\nenquirer cannot doubt (whatever motives or views some may have to deny\nthe fact, or throw doubt on its authenticity), that the order of\nTemplars was the channel by which this society in its ancient and long\npreserved form was introduced into the West. The religious\n_Masonic_ symbols may be accounted for by the Solomonian\ntraditions connected with the very foundation of the order of\nTemplars; and indeed the occasion of these symbols may be traced in\nother passages of Holy Writ, and in other parts of sacred history, and\nthey may very well admit of a Christian interpretation. Traces of\nthese symbols may be found in the monuments of the old German\narchitecture of the middle age. Any secret spiritual association,\nhowever, diffused at once among Christians and Mahometans, cannot be\nof a very Christian nature, nor long continue so. Nay the very idea of\nan esoteric society for the propagation of any secret doctrines is not\ncompatible with the very principle of Christianity itself; for\nChristianity is a divine mystery, which according to the intention of\nits divine Founder, lies open to all, and is daily exposed on every\naltar. For this reason, in a Revelation imparted to all alike, there\ncan be no secrecy, as in the Pagan mysteries, where by the side of the\npopular mythology and the public religion of the state, certain\nesoteric doctrines were inculcated to the initiated only. This would\nbe to constitute a church within a church--a measure to be as little\ntolerated or justified, as an Imperium in Imperio; and in an age\nwhere worldly interests and public or secret views of policy have far\ngreater ascendancy than religious opinions or sentiments, such a\nsecret parasitical church would unquestionably, as experience has\nalready proved, be very soon transformed into a secret directory for\npolitical changes and Revolutions. That in this society the\nun-christian principles of a negative Illuminism, veiled as they often\nwere in sentiments of universal philanthropy, were of a date tolerably\nmodern, all historical analogies would lead us to suppose. On the\nother hand, the Christian opinions which survived in this order,\n(though in our times, amid the innumerable factions which have\nagitated this society by their contests, the adherents to Christian\nprinciples form a small minority of its members,) the Christian\nopinions surviving in this order partook, conformably to the\nhistorical origin I have assigned, more of an oriental and Gnostic\ncharacter. The great, or at least, not inconsiderable influence which\nthis society exercises in politics, we may discover in those\nRevolutions, which after having convulsed our quarter of the globe,\nhave rolled onwards to the new world, where the two principal\nRevolutionary factions in one of those South American states, whose\ntroubles are not yet terminated, are called the Scots and the\nYorkists, from the two parties which divide the English Masonic\nlodges. Who does not know, or who does not remember, that the ruler of\nthe world in the period just passed, made use of this vehicle in all\nthe countries he conquered, to delude and deceive the nations with\nfalse hopes. And on this account he was styled by his partisans the\nman of his age, and in fact he was a slave to the spirit of his age. A\nsociety, from whose bosom, as from the secret laboratory of\nRevolution, the Illumin\u00e9s, the Jacobins, and the Carbonari, have\nsuccessively proceeded, cannot possibly be termed, or be in fact very\nbeneficial to mankind, politically sound, or truly Christian in its\nviews and tendency. Still I must here observe, that it has been the\nfate of the oldest of all secret societies, that its venerable forms\nwhich are known to all the initiated, should serve as a cloak to every\nnew conspiracy. In the next place, we must not forget that this order\nitself appears to be split and divided into a multitude of different\nsects and factions; and that on this account we must not suppose that\nall those fearful aberrations, and wild excesses of impiety, all those\nopenly destructive or secretly undermining principles of Revolution\nwere universally approved of by this society. On the contrary, such a\nsupposition would be utterly false, or at least, very exaggerated. The\nmere notice of all the highly estimable characters, mistaken but on\nthis point--of most distinguished and illustrious personages in the\neighteenth century, members of this association,--would suffice to\nannul, or at least materially modify, this sweeping censure. From many\nindications, we may consider it certain, or at least extremely\nprobable, that in no country did this esoteric society so well\nharmonize with the state and the whole established order of things, as\nin that country where all the conflicting elements of morals and\nsociety are brought into a sort of strange and artificial equipoise--I\nmean England. If now we turn our view to the Continent of Europe, and\neven to those countries which were the chief theatre of the\nRevolution, we shall see that there, among many other factions, a\nChristian party had sprung up in this society--a party which, though\nit formed a very small minority in point of numbers, possessed by its\nprofounder doctrines, and the interesting fragments of ancient\ntradition it had preserved, a great moral ascendancy; and this many\nhistorical facts, and many written documents, which have since\nobtained publicity, place beyond the shadow of a doubt. Instead of\nbringing forward the names of some German writers less generally\nknown, I prefer to allege, in confirmation of what I have said, the\nexample of a French writer, who well denotes the internal and more\nhidden character of the Revolution. The Christian theosophist, St.\nMartin, who was a disciple of this school, stands in his age quite\napart from the other organs of the then prevailing Atheistical\nphilosophy. He was however a most decided Revolutionist, (but a\ndisinterested fanatic, guided entirely in his conduct by high and\nmoral motives), from his utter contempt and abhorrence for the whole\nmoral and political system of Europe, as it then stood--a contempt in\nwhich, if we cannot entirely agree with him, we cannot in many\ninstances withhold from him at least a sort of negative\napprobation--and, secondly, he was a Revolutionist by his enthusiastic\nhope of a complete Christian regeneration of society, conceived indeed\naccording to his own views, or the views of his party. Among the\nFrench writers of the Restoration, none have so thoroughly understood\nthis remarkable philosopher, and so well known how to appreciate him\nin all the depths of his errors, as well as in the many excellent\nthings which his writings contain, and to apply to him the necessary\ncorrections, as Count Maistre.\n\nThis secret clue in the history of the Revolution must not be\noverlooked, if we would wish to form a due estimate of its character;\nfor it greatly contributed to the illusion of many, by no means\nill-intentioned persons, who saw or wished to see in the Revolution\nbut the inevitable, necessary, though in its origin, harsh and severe,\nregeneration of Christian states and nations, then so widely gone off\nfrom their original destination. This illusive notion of a false\nrestoration of society was particularly prevalent during the Imperial\nsway of that extraordinary man, whose true biography--I mean the high\nmoral law of his destiny, or the theological key to his life--seems\nstill to exceed the critical powers of our age. Seven years were\nallotted him for the growth of his power--for fourteen years the\nworld was delivered over into his hands; and seven years were left him\nfor solitary reflection, the first of which he misemployed in\nembroiling the world anew. On the use he made of the extraordinary\npower that had been imparted to him---of that formidable dominion\nwhich had fallen to his lot, history has long pronounced her sentence.\nNever is such power permitted but in the period of, and with a view\nto, some awful reckoning, and a still more fearful probation of\nmankind. But if his Restoration--that is to say, the Restoration which\nhis infatuated partisans attributed to him, was most certainly a false\none;--the question naturally occurs, whether the Restoration attempted\nby his successors has been perfectly sound, or at least quite\ncomplete; and what may be the defects in the new system, and how they\nmay be supplied?\n\nA mere treaty of territorial arrangements could not and can never\nconstitute a great religious and international pacification for the\nwhole of Europe. The re-establishment of subverted thrones--the\nRestoration of exiled sovereigns and dynasties, will not in themselves\nhave any security nor permanence, unless based on moral principles and\nmaxims. After the severe unexpected lesson again inflicted on Europe,\nreligion was at last made the basis of European policy; and we must\nnot make it a matter of reproach, that this principle still retained\nso indefinite a character; for this was necessary at the beginning at\nleast, in order to remove any misconception, or any possible suspicion\nof interested views. And not only doth the stability and future\nexistence of the whole Christian and civilized world depend on this\nbond of religious confederacy,--which we can only hope may be ever\nmore and more firmly knit--but every great power in particular is more\nespecially called upon to take a part therein. That the moral strength\nand stability of the Russian Empire mainly depends on religion--that\nevery departure from its sacred spirit must have the most fatal\neffects on its whole system, has already been declared by her late\nmonarch, distinguished alike in adverse and in prosperous fortune, an\naxiom of state-policy, and can scarcely ever be again forgotten. But\nin that country, where the elements of Protestantism (to use that word\nin its most comprehensive signification) obtained such weight in the\noutset of its literary refinement, and are so incorporated with the\nwhole political system of the state, the toleration extended to every\nform of worship, should not be withheld from that church, which is the\nmother-church of the rest of Europe, and of Poland inclusively;[20]\nnor should the religious liberty of individuals be in that respect at\nall restricted.\n\nIt is equally evident that in that country of Europe where monarchy\nhas been restored, the restoration of religion must go hand in hand\nwith that of monarchy, and that the latter would lose all security\nwere the former removed. In the pacific monarchy,[21] unchangeably\nattached as she is to her ancient principles, religion has ever been,\nmore than any other principle, the recognised basis of her existence.\nAs to the fifth[22] Germanico-European monarchy recently created, the\nsolid maintenance of religion is the only means to allay the disquiet\nincident to such a state, and to secure its future existence. Any act\nof even indirect hostility towards the Catholic body--one half of the\nnation[23]--any infringement on the liberty of individuals in that\nsacred concern--a liberty which must be guaranteed not only by the\nletter of the law, but by real, effective and practical\nmeasures--would not only be in utter opposition to those religious\nprinciples, rapidly spreading as they are in all Europe, and\nparticularly in Germany; but would violate and render insecure the\ngreat fundamental and long established principle of toleration; as has\nhitherto been acknowledged. It is only in England that Anglicanism has\nraised her doubts as to the utility of a religious fraternity among\nthe Christian states and nations--doubts which are connected with the\nstill exclusively Protestant character of the English Constitution,\nand which on many occasions may lead England to a sort of schismatical\nrupture with the rest of Europe. On several occasions we must\ncontemplate with regret, how that mighty England, in the eighteenth\ncentury so brilliant and so powerful by the sway she exerted over the\nwhole European mind, no longer seems to feel herself at home in the\nnineteenth century, nor to know where to find her place in the new\norder of things.\n\nBut as respects Europe at large, the maxims and principles of\nliberalism are only a partial return to the Revolution--they can have\nno other tendency but to Revolution. Liberalism will never obtain a\nmajority among the well-thinking persons of any of the European\nstates, except by some gross error--some singular degeneracy in that\nparty, which really does not constitute a party, and ought not to be\ncalled such--I mean the men who in politics are attached to monarchy,\nand in religion to Christianity.\n\nThe mere principle of a mechanical Balance of Power to serve as a\nnegative check on overgrown dominion--a system which emanated from\nEngland, and was in the eighteenth century universally received--has\nceased to be applicable, or to be of service to the existing state of\nthings in Europe; for all the remedies which it can offer, tend only\nto aggravate the evil when it has once occurred. In religion alone are\nto be found the remedies and the safeguards, the emancipation and\nconsolidation of the whole civilized world, as well as of every\nparticular state. The most imminent danger to our age, and the\npossible abuse of religion itself, are the excesses of the absolute.\nGreat is the danger, when in a vindictive spirit of re-action, a\nrevolutionary conduct is adopted by the party of legitimacy; when\npassion itself is consecrated into a maxim of reason, and held up as\nthe only valid and just mode of proceeding; and when, the sacredness\nof religion itself is hawked about as some fashionable opinion; as if\nthe world-redeeming power of faith and truth consisted in the mere\ndead letter, and in the recited formula. True life can spring only\nfrom the vivifying spirit of eternal truth. In science the absolute is\nthe abyss which swallows up the living truth, and leaves behind only\nthe hollow idea, and the dead formula. In the political world the\nabsolute in conduct and speculation is that false spirit of time,\nopposed to all good and to the fulness of divine truth, which in a\ngreat measure rules the world, and may entirely rule it, and lead it\nfor ever to its final ruin. As errors would not be dangerous or\ndeceptive, and would have little effect, unless they contained a\nportion or appearance of truth; this false spirit of time which\nsuccessively assumes all forms of destruction, since it has abandoned\nthe path of eternal truth, consists in this--it withdraws particular\nfacts from their historical connection, and holds them up as the\ncentre and term of a system, without any limitation, and without any\nregard to historical circumstances. The true foundation, and the right\nterm of things, in the history of society as in the lives of\nindividuals, cannot be thus severed from their historical connection,\nand their place in the natural order of events. In any speculation or\nenterprise conducted by this passionate spirit of exaggeration, the\nliving spirit must evaporate, and only the dead and deadening formula\nsurvive. What idols may successively be worshipped by the changing\nspirit of time which easily bounds from one extreme to another, cannot\nbe determined before-hand. It is even possible that for a while\neternal truth itself may be profaned and perverted to such an idol of\nthe day--I mean the counterfeit form of truth;--for the spirit of\ntime, however it may assume the garb, can never attain the inward\nessence and living energy of truth. Whatever may be the alternate\nidol, and the reigning object of its worship, or of its passionate\nrhetoric, it still remains essentially the same--that is to say, the\nabsolute, alike deadening to intellect, and destructive to life. In\nscience, the absolute is the idol of vain and empty systems, of dead\nand abstract reason.\n\nThe Christian faith has the living God and his revelation for its\nobject, and is itself that revelation; hence every doctrine taken from\nthis source is something real and positive. The defence of truth\nagainst error will then only be attended with permanent success, when\nthe divine doctrine, in whatever department it may be, is represented\nwith intellectual energy as a living principle; and at the same time\nplaced in its historical connection, with a due regard to every other\nhistorical reality. This calm, historical judgment of things--this\nacute insight into subjects, whether they be real facts or\nintellectual phenomena--is the invariable concomitant of truth, and\nthe indispensable condition to the full knowledge of truth. This is\nthe more so, indeed, as religion, which forms the basis of all truth,\nand of all knowledge, naturally traces with attentive eye the\nmysterious clue of Divine Providence and Divine permission through the\nlong labyrinth of human errors and human follies, be they of a\npractical or a speculative nature. Error, on the other hand, is always\nunhistorical; the spirit of time almost always passionate; and both\nconsequently untrue. The conflict against error cannot be brought to a\nprompter and more successful issue, than by separating in every system\nof moral and speculative error, and according to the standard of\ndivine truth, the absolute, which is the basis of such systems, into\nits two component parts of truth and falsehood. For when we\nacknowledge and point out the truth to be found in those systems,\nthere only remains error, whose inanity it requires little labour,\nlittle cost of talent, or time to expose and make evident to every\neye. But in real life the struggle of parties often ceases to be\npurely intellectual--their physical energy is displayed in violent\ncommotions; and in proportion as all parties become absolute, so their\nstruggle becomes one of violent and mutual destruction--a circumstance\nwhich most fatally impedes the great work of religious regeneration--the\nmighty problem of our age, which so far from being brought to a\nsatisfactory termination, is not yet even solved. In this respect it\nis no doubt a critical fact, that in certain quarters of European\nlife, nay even in some entire countries, parties and governments\nshould be more and more carried away by the spirit of absolutism. For\nthis is not a question of names, and it is very evident that not those\nparties, which are called, or call themselves absolute, are the most\nso in reality; since now, as in all periods of violent party\nstruggles, a whimsical mistake in names, a great disorder of ideas,\nand a Babel confusion of tongues, occur even in those languages\notherwise distinguished for their clearness and precision.\n\nFixedness of principle, consistency in reasoning, firmness of\ncharacter, and the severe, dogmatic precision of faith, as these are\nthe qualities which form the best test of man in the intercourse of\nlife, so they ought by no means to be confounded with absolutism\neither in conduct or speculation; for all these qualities are very\ncompatible with the calm historical judgment of things, and a\nconscientious regard for all historical circumstances. Among the\nFrench writers of recent times who have devoted themselves to the task\nof the religious regeneration of the public mind, no one possesses the\nabove-named qualities in a higher, or in so remarkable a degree, as\nCount Maistre; and yet of all the writers of this class, he is the\nleast open to the charge of promoting a passionate spirit of reaction;\nand in my own opinion, he must be entirely acquitted of such an\nimputation. Some more rhetorical defenders, however, of religion in\nFrance, cannot certainly be entirely absolved from the charge of\nfavouring this absolute and exaggerated spirit of re-action; and so\nthey unquestionably, even more than their opponents, injure the cause\nwhich they wish to defend. But many imputations of this sort which\nparty spirit has alleged, are entirely without foundation; as when the\nopposition in the country I speak of, extends to the government, and\nto all the different ministries since the Restoration, the charge of\npolitical absolutism, and of a spirit of re-action; every one must\nclearly see that no cause has really been given for such imputations.\nAnd that in a country where the most hostile parties and all\nconceivable opinions are tolerated, a small number of Jesuits should\npartake of the general toleration, is a circumstance that can excite\nblame, jealousy and hypocritical alarm, only in the breasts of men\nanimated by the unjust and vindictive spirit of faction. To the\ndistant and impartial observer, the greatest and most imminent danger\nto France appears to be a relapse to Revolution by means of\nliberalism.[24]\n\nThe dogmatic decision and definiteness of Catholic faith on the one\nhand, and the firmly rooted private convictions of Protestantism on\nthe other, are very compatible with an historical judgment of\nhistorical events. Difficult as this may appear to the absolute spirit\nof our age, it is this very historical impartiality which must prepare\nthe way for the complete triumph of truth, and the consummate glory of\nChristianity. And it is in this consists the great distinction between\ntrue toleration and the fatal indifferentism of our age, and of the\nage immediately preceding. True toleration is founded on the humble\nand consequently religious principle and firm hope, that while one\nleaves in quiet what has already an historical existence, God will\nconduct and arrange all things, and bring them to their appointed end.\nThis is widely remote from that pretended equality of all religions,\nprovided they inculcate but a good morality--a system which strikes at\nthe root of all religion. Intolerance, on the other hand, is grounded\nin the proud, and therefore impious opinion, that it can mould all\nthings to what it fancies they ought to be, without any regard to the\nlimits of human weakness--and without reflecting that what is put\ndown by outward force, not unfrequently grows up in secret in an\naltered, though still more dangerous, form. Of this truth, it would\nnot be difficult to adduce many historical proofs.\n\nIn the absolute spirit of our age, and in the absolute character of\nits factions, there is a deep-rooted intellectual pride, which is not\nso much personal or individual, as social, for it refers to the\nhistorical destiny of mankind, and of this age in particular. Actuated\nby this pride, a spirit exalted by moral energy, or invested with\nexternal power, fancies it can give a real existence to that which can\nonly be the work of God: as from him alone proceed all those mighty,\nand real regenerations of the world, among which Christianity--a\nrevolution in the high and divine sense of the word--occupies the\nfirst place; and in these plastic moments, every thing is possible\nthat man can wish or dare to hope, if in what he adds on his own part,\nhe mars not much in what the bounteous monarch of the universe, from\nthe overflowings of his ineffable love, outpours upon his earth. For\nthe last three hundred years this human pride has been at work--a\npride that wishes to originate events, instead of humbly awaiting\nthem, and of resting contented with the place assigned to it among\nthose events, and of making the best and most charitable use of those\ncircumstances which Providence has decreed.\n\nWhat I said before with regard to the Reformation may be equally\napplied to the principle and period of Illuminism. The idea itself is\nperfectly blameless, and it is unfair to pronounce on it an\nindiscriminate censure, and to treat it as an unqualified abuse. It\nwas indeed but a very small portion of this illuminism of the\neighteenth century, that was really derived from the truths of\nChristianity, and the pure light of Revelation. The rest was the mere\nwork of man, consequently vain and empty, or at least defective,\ncorrupt in parts, and, on the whole, destitute of a solid foundation,\nand therefore devoid of all permanent strength and duration.\n\nBut when once, after the complete victory of truth, the divine\nReformation shall appear;--then that human Reformation, which till now\nhath existed, will sink to the ground, and disappear from the world.\nThen by the universal triumph of Christianity, and the thorough\nreligious regeneration of the age, of the world, and of governments\nthemselves, will dawn the era of a true Christian _Illuminism_.\nThis period is not perhaps so remote from our own, as the natural\nindolence of the human mind, which after every great occurrence, loves\nto sink again into the death-sleep of ordinary life, would be disposed\nto believe. Yet must this exalted religious hope--this high historical\nexpectation be coupled with great apprehension, as to the full display\nof divine justice in the world. For how is such a religious\nregeneration possible, until every species, form, and denomination of\npolitical idolatry be eradicated, and entirely extirpated from the\nearth?\n\nNever was there a period that pointed so strongly, so clearly, so\ngenerally towards the future, as our own. On this account we should\nendeavour clearly and accurately to distinguish between what on the\none hand man may by slow, progressive, but unweared exertions--by the\npacific adjustment of all disputed points--and by the cultivation of\nhis intellectual qualities, contribute towards the great work of the\nreligious regeneration of government and science--and what on the\nother hand he should look for in silent awe from a higher\nProvidence--from the new creative fiat of a last period of\nconsummation, unable as he is to produce or call it forth. We are\ndirected much more towards the future than towards the past;--but in\norder to comprehend in all its magnitude the problem of our age, it\nsufficeth not that we should seek this social regeneration in the\neighteenth century--an age in no respect entitled to praise--or in the\nreign of Lewis the Fourteenth, and his times of false national glory.\nThe birth of Christianity must be the great point of survey to which\nwe must recur, not to bring back, or counterfeit the forms of ages\npast, which are no longer applicable to our own; but clearly to\nexamine what has remained incomplete, what has not yet been attained.\nFor unquestionably, all that has been neglected in the earlier periods\nand stages of Christian civilization, must be made good in this true,\nconsummate regeneration of society. If truth is to obtain a complete\nvictory--if Christianity is really to triumph on the earth--then must\nthe state become Christian, and science become Christian. But these\ntwo objects have never been generally, nor completely realized;\nalthough during the many ages mankind have been Christian, they have\nstruggled for the attainment of both; and though this political\nstruggle and this intellectual aspiration form the purport of modern\nhistory. The Roman Empire, even after the true religion had become\npredominant, was too thoroughly and radically corrupt, ever to form a\ntruly Christian state. The sound, unvitiated natural energy of the\nGermanic nations, seemed far better fitted for such a destiny, after\nthey had received from Christianity a high religious consecration for\nthis purpose. There was, if we may so speak, in the interior of each\nstate, as well as in the general system of Christendom, a most\nmagnificent foundation laid for a truly Christian structure of\ngovernment. But this ground-work remained unfinished, after the\ninternal divisions in the state, then the divisions between church and\nstate, and lastly, the divisions in the church and in religion itself,\nhad interrupted the successful beginnings of a most glorious work.\n\nThe ecclesiastical writers of the first ages furnish a solid\nfoundation for all the future labours of Christian science; but their\nscience does not comprehend all the branches of human knowledge. In\nthe middle age, undoubtedly, this foundation of a Christian science,\nlaid down by the early fathers, was slowly prosecuted and in detail;\nbut on the whole, many hurtful influences of the time had reduced\nscience and speculation to a very low ebb, when suddenly in the\nfifteenth century all the literary treasures of ancient Greece, and\nall the new discoveries in geography and physics, were offered to\nphilosophy. Scarcely had philosophy begun to examine these mighty\nstores of ancient and modern science, in order to give them a\nChristian form, and to appropriate them to the use of religion and\nmodern society, when the world again broke out into disputes; and this\nnoble beginning of a Christian philosophy was interrupted, and has\nsince remained an unfinished fragment for a later and a happier\nperiod. Such then is the two-fold problem of a real and complete\nregeneration which our age is called upon to solve;--on one hand, the\nfurther extension of Christian government, and of Catholic principles\nof legislation, in opposition to the Revolutionary spirit of the age,\nand to the anti-Christian principle of government hitherto so\nexclusively prevalent; and on the other hand the establishment of a\nChristian philosophy, or Catholic science. As I before characterized\nthe political spirit of the eighteenth century by the term--Protestantism\nof state (taking that word in a purely philosophic sense, and not as a\nreligious designation)--a system which found its one main support in\nan old Catholic Empire;[25] and as I characterized the intellectual\nspirit of the same age by the term Protestantism of science;--a\nscience which made the greatest progress and exerted the widest\ninfluence in another[26] great Catholic country; systems in which\nnothing irreligious was originally intended, but which became so by\ntheir too exclusive or negative bearing: so I may here permit myself\nto say, in like manner, that the destiny of this age--the peculiar\nwant of the nineteenth century, is the establishment of those Catholic\nprinciples of government, and the general construction of a Catholic\nsystem of science. This expression is used in a mere scientific sense,\nand refers to all that is positively and completely religious in\nthought and feeling. In the certain conviction that this cannot be\nmisunderstood in an exclusive or polemical sense, I will expressly add\nthat this foundation of Catholic legislation for the future political\nexistence of Europe may be laid by one, or more than one, non-catholic\npower; and that I even cherish the hope, that it is our own Germany,\none half whereof is Protestant, which more than any other country is\ndestined to complete the fabric of Catholic science, and of a true\nChristian philosophy in all the departments of human knowledge.\n\nThe religious hope of a true and complete regeneration of the age, by\na Christian system of government and a Christian system of science,\nforms the conclusion to this Philosophy of History. The bond of a\nreligious union between all the European states will be more closely\nknit, and be more comprehensive, in proportion as each nation advances\nin the work of its own religious regeneration, and carefully avoids\nall relapse to the old revolutionary spirit--all worship of the false\nidols of mistaken freedom, or illusive glory, and rejects every other\nnew form or species of political idolatry. For it is the very nature\nof political idolatry to lead to the mutual destruction of parties,\nand consequently it can never possess the elements of stability.\n\nPhilosophy, as it is the vivifying centre of all other sciences, must\nbe the principal concern and the highest object of the labours of\nChristian science. Yet history, which is so closely and so variously\nconnected with religion, must by no means be forgotten, nor must\nhistorical research be separated from philosophic speculation. On the\ncontrary, it is the religious spirit and views already pervading the\ncombined efforts of historical learning and philosophic speculation,\nthat chiefly distinguish this new era of a better intellectual\nculture, or as I should rather express myself, this first stage of a\nreturn to the great religious restoration. And I may venture to assert\nthat this spirit, at least in the present century, has become ever\nmore and more the prevailing characteristic of German science, and on\nthis science, in its relation to the moral wants, and spiritual\ncalling of the nineteenth century, I have now a few observations to\nmake. Like an image reflected in a mirror, or like those symptoms\nwhich precede and announce a crisis in human events, the centre-point\nof all government, or the religious basis of legislation, is sure to\nbe reflected in the whole mental culture, or in the most remarkable\nintellectual productions of a nation. In England, the equilibrium of a\nconstitution that combines in itself so many conflicting elements, is\nreflected in its philosophy. The revolutionary spirit was prevalent in\nthe French literature of the eighteenth century long before it broke\nout in real life; and the struggle is still very animated between the\nintellectual defenders and champions of the monarchical and religious\nRestoration, and of the newly awakened liberal opposition. In like\nmanner, as the German people were, and still are, half Catholic and\nhalf Protestant, it is religious peace which in all literature, and\nparticularly in philosophy, forms the basis of their modern\nintellectual culture. The mere \u00e6sthetic part of German letters, as\nregards art and poetry,--that artist-like enthusiasm peculiar to our\nnation--the struggles which convulsed the infancy of our\nliterature--the successive imitation and rejection of the French and\nEnglish models--the very general diffusion of classical learning--the\nnewly enkindled love for our native speech, and for the early history\nof our country, and its elder monuments of art--all these are subjects\nof minor interest in the European point of view we here take, and form\nbut the prelude and introduction to that higher German science and\nphilosophy, which is now more immediately the subject of our\nenquiries. Historical research should never be separated from any\nphilosophy, still less from the German; as historical erudition is the\nmost effectual counterpoise to that absolute spirit, so prevalent in\nGerman science and German speculation.\n\nArt and poetry constitute that department of intellect wherein every\nnation should mostly follow the impulse of its own spirit, its own\nfeelings, and its own turn of fancy; and we must regard it as an\nexception when the poetry of any particular nation, (such, for\ninstance, as that of the English at the present day), is felt and\nreceived by other nations as an European poetry. On the other hand,\nhistory is a sort of intellectual common open to all European nations.\nThe English, who in this department were ever so active and\ndistinguished, have, in very recent times, produced works on their own\nnational history, which really merit the name of classical monuments\nof the new religious restoration. Science in general, and philosophy\nin particular, should never be exclusive or national--should never be\ncalled English or German--but should be general and European. And if\nthis is not so entirely the case as in the nature of things it ought\nto be--we must ascribe it to the defects of particular forms. Of this\ntruth the example of the French language may convince us; for no one\nwill deny the metaphysical profundity of Count Maistre, or the\ndialectic perspicacity of the Viscount De Bonald. Although those\nabsolute principles which appear to characterize the European nations\nat this time, have much less influence on real life and on the social\nrelations in Germany than in any other country; yet the false spirit\nof the absolute seems to be quite native to German science and\nphilosophy; and for a long period, has been the principal cause which\nhas cramped the religious spirit and feelings so natural to the German\ncharacter, or at least has given them a false direction.\n\nWith regard to religious opinions, Protestantism in Germany has not\nbeen split into a multitude of new, various, and jarring sects, as in\nother countries, such as England, Holland, and North America, where it\nwas exclusively or for the most part predominant; for even the\nHernhutters were not properly a sect. It is only very recently the\nPietists have formed themselves into a party opposed to the\nRationalists--but their doctrines are not sufficiently precise and\ndeterminate to constitute them a sect, according to the proper\nsignification of that word. Pietism consists rather in a deep, though\nvague, sentiment of religion, and in a fusion of various and opposite\nreligious views and doctrines. Undoubtedly this moral fusion of\nopinions, as well as that outward complication of the interests and\ndoctrines of Catholicism and Protestantism, and of so many private\nviews in matters of religion, produced many wild and fanciful\nabortions peculiar to the age; many pure idiosyncrasies among the\nProtestants, whether they made half advances towards the Catholic\nchurch, or pursued the opposite path of absolute individualism--or\namong the Catholics still more monstrous amalgamations--Protestant or\nsemi-Protestant innovations in doctrine aimed at by\nindividuals--innovations which originated in the principles of\nIlluminism, and were countenanced by the well-known policy of certain\nsovereigns. Much as we may feel disposed, or are even bound to oppose\nwith all our might, such moral abortions, when the question regards\ntheir practical operation--yet I do not think we ought to pronounce\nan absolutely unfavourable judgment on their general intellectual\ntendency. The real primary evil of the eighteenth century--an utter\nindifference for all religious doctrines and concerns,--the dangerous\nspirit of complete indifferentism, from whose contagion many purely\nCatholic countries did not escape, took less strong hold in Germany,\nand obtained less general diffusion than in any other country. A deep,\nindelible religious feeling still continued to characterize the German\nnation, and to give a tone to its philosophical speculations. We should\nnot pay too much attention to some transient and partial paradoxes:--I\nwell recollect the words of an old, very experienced, pious, and\nenlightened ecclesiastic, who well understood the German character,\nand who used to say; \"If we don't give a religion to the Germans, they\nwill make one out for themselves.\"\n\nEven in the greatest errors of their philosophy, a certain religious\nbearing and tendency can easily be pointed out. However in a country\nlike Germany, where religious opinions and interests are so various\nand so intermixed, a long time must elapse before a profound\nphilosophy, which would satisfy these yearnings of religious desire,\ncan attain its full moral developement, or assume a clear outward\ntangible form. If I before said of the English, in reference to the\nstruggle going on between the conflicting elements of their\ngovernment--a struggle which in one form or other every great European\nnation has to settle in its own interior, and to bring to a successful\nissue--that it would appear by many expressions in their parliamentary\nproceedings, from those in particular at the head of affairs, and who\nare best acquainted with them, that a secret self-apprehension besets\nthe minds of English politicians;--so I may now say of our German\nnation, among whom the conflict lies principally, or more immediately\nin the sphere of religion and philosophy; that more than all other\nnations the Germans are destitute of self-knowledge and of mutual\nconcord; and the cause of this must be sought for in the unfulfilment\nof their religious and philosophical destiny, and in the yet unallayed\ndiscord between opposite elements of faith and various systems of\nscience.\n\nIn the first period of German literature, the Protestants had quite\nthe preponderance; but since then, the balance, at least in science,\nhas been completely restored. I speak here of internal religious\nprinciples, and not of outward confessions of faith, which cannot be\nmade the criterion for a philosophic classification. For otherwise by\ndescending into details, I might cite, among the few quite irreligious\norgans of German philosophy, some writers (happily rare exceptions)\nwho belonged to Catholic Germany; and on the other hand, among those\nforemost and most distinguished in reviving the pure Platonic\nphilosophy, and whose profound religious conceptions have given quite\na Christian form to natural philosophy itself, I might adduce the\nnames of men who were members of the Protestant church. Philosophy\nitself has not to determine, nor to illustrate religious dogmas, nor\ndoes it stand in immediate connection with them. The main point to\nwhich I wish to direct attention, and which is necessary to render\nphilosophy Christian; is that an internal harmony or unison should be\npreserved between faith and science; next that the principle of\ndivine revelation should be regarded as the basis, not only of\ntheology but of every other science; and lastly, that even nature\nherself should be studied and investigated by this high religious\nlight, and thus made to receive from science a new and transparent\nlustre. The modern German philosophy even in its infancy, when it was\nyet pretty closely allied to the English school, and mostly started\nwith the same problems (though it gave to these a deeper and a wider\nsolution), aimed at this harmony between faith and science. It\nunderstood both indeed in the very limited sense of a mere faith of\nreason and science of reason, influenced as it was by the Rationalism\nthen so generally diffused, not only in Protestant but even in\nCatholic countries, and notably in Catholic Germany. But at the same\ntime other profound thinkers sought another and higher foundation for\nphilosophy in the idea of revelation; a revelation which some\nunderstood in a mere general and speculative, though not irreligious,\nsense--and others in the Christian sense of positive faith and pious\nfeeling. The capital vice of German philosophy is the absolute--the\nphilosophic reflection of the general vice of the spirit of the age,\nwhich exerts an absolute influence on life itself--whether this vice\nof German philosophy assume the form of the absolute ego,[27] or that\nof the Pantheistic naturalism,[28] or that of absolute reason.[29] It\nis this which originally gave to the natural philosophy of the Germans\na false Pantheistic direction, for the real materialism which has\nfound so many advocates among the French Naturalists, has from the\nvery ideal tendency of the German mind, experienced little favour in\nGermany. Yet this foreign influence was not of long continuance--German\nphysics became deeply imbued with a religious spirit, and the German\nnatural philosophy is now in the hands of its first representatives\ndecidedly Christian. And this progress in the great work of the\nreligious regeneration of science, I must consider as the noblest\ntriumph of genius, for it is precisely in the department of physics\nthe problem was the most difficult; and all that rich and boundless\ntreasure of new discoveries in nature, which are ever better\nunderstood when viewed in connection with the high truths of religion,\nmust be looked upon as the property of Christian science. The various\nsystems of philosophic Rationalism, mutually subversive, as they are,\nof each other, will fall to the ground, and the vulgar Rationalism\nwhich is but an emanation of the higher, and which still prevails in\nsome particular schools, and in many of the lower walks of German\nliterature, will finally disappear; in proportion as German philosophy\nbecomes imbued with the spirit of religion, and German science becomes\nthoroughly Christian, or Catholic. In the firm hope that this will\ncertainly happen, I have given publicity to these first essays of a\nphilosophy I had long in secret prepared; and of which the first part,\n\"the Philosophy of Life,\" treats of consciousness, or of the inward\nman: the second, \"this Philosophy of History,\" which I now have here\nbrought to a close, considers the outward man, or the progress of\nstates and nations through all ages of the world.\n\nThat in this progress of mankind, a divine Hand and conducting\nProvidence are clearly discernible; that earthly and visible power has\nnot alone co-operated in this progress, and in the opposition which\nhas impeded it; but that the struggle has been in part carried on\nunder divine, and against invisible might;--is a truth, I trust, which\nif not proved to mathematical evidence, (an evidence here neither\nappropriate nor applicable), has still been substantiated on firm and\nsolid grounds. We may conclude our work, by a retrospective view of\nsociety, considered in reference to that invisible world and higher\nregion, from which the operations of this visible world proceed, in\nwhich its great destinies have their root, and which is the ultimate\nand highest term of all its movements.\n\nChristianity is the emancipation of the human race from the bondage of\nthat inimical spirit, who denies God, and, as far as in him lies,\nleads all created intelligences astray. Hence the Scripture styles\nhim, \"the Prince of this world;\" and so he was in fact, but in ancient\nhistory only, when among all the nations of the earth, and amid the\npomp of martial glory, and the splendour of Pagan life, he had\nestablished the throne of his domination. Since this divine era in the\nhistory of man, since the commencement of his emancipation in modern\ntimes, this spirit can no longer be called the prince of this world,\nbut the _spirit of time_, the spirit opposed to divine influence,\nand to the Christian religion, apparent in those who consider and\nestimate time and all things temporal, not by the law and feeling of\neternity, but for temporal interests or from temporal motives, change,\nor undervalue, and forget the thoughts and faith of eternity.\n\nIn the first ages of the Christian church, this spirit of time\nappeared as a beguiling sectarian spirit. This spirit obtained its\nhighest triumph in the new and false faith of a fanatic Unitarianism,\nutterly opposed to the religion of love, and which severed from\nChristianity so large a portion of the Eastern church, and whole\nregions of Asia. In the middle ages this spirit displayed itself, not\nso much in hostile sects, as in scholastic disputes, in divisions\nbetween church and state, and in the internal disorders of both. At\nthe commencement of the new era of the world, the spirit of time\nclaimed as an urgent want of mankind, full freedom of faith; a claim\nof which the immediate consequence was only a bloody warfare, and a\nfatal struggle of life and death protracted beyond a century. When\nthis struggle was terminated, or rather appeased, it was succeeded by\nan utter indifference for all religions, provided only their morality\nwere good; and the spirit of time proclaimed religious _indifferentism_,\nas the order of the day. This apparent calm was followed by the\nrevolutionary tempest, and now that this has passed away, the spirit\nof time has in our days become absolute--that is to say, it has\nperverted reason to party--passion, or exalted passion, to the place\nof reason; and this is the existing form and last metamorphosis of the\nold evil spirit of time.\n\nTurning now to that Divine aid which has supported mankind in their\never-enduring struggle against their own infirmities, against all the\nobstacles of nature, and natural circumstances, and against the\nopposition of the evil spirit; I have endeavoured to shew, that in the\nfirst thousand years of Primitive History, Divine Revelation, although\npreserved in its native purity but in the one original source, still\nflowed in copious streams through the religious traditions of the\nother great nations of that pristine epoch; and that troubled as the\ncurrent might be by the admixture of many errors, yet was it easy to\ntrace it in the midst of this slime and pollution, to its pure and\nsacred source. And with such a belief must commence every religious\nview of universal history. And it is only with this religious belief,\nand perception of the traces of divine revelation, we can rightly\ncomprehend and judge this primitive epoch of history. We shall prize\nwith deeper, more earnest, and more solid affection, the great and\ndivine era of man's redemption and emancipation (occurring as it does\nin the middle-point of human history), the more accurately we\ndiscriminate between what is essentially divine and unchangeably\neternal in this revelation of love, and the elements of destruction\nwhich man has opposed thereto, or intermingled therewith. And it is\nonly in the spirit of love, the history of Christian times can be\nrightly understood and accurately judged. In later ages, when the\nspirit of discord has triumphed over love, historical hope is our only\nremaining clue in the labyrinth of history. It is only with sentiments\nof grateful admiration, of amazement, and awe, we trace in the special\ndispensations of providence, for the advancement of Christianity and\nthe progress of modern society, the wonderful concurrence of events\ntowards the single object of divine love, or the unexpected exercise\nof divine justice long delayed; such as I have in the proper places\nendeavoured to point out. With this faith in Primitive Revelation, and\nin the glorious consummation of Christian love, I cannot better\nconclude this \"Philosophy of History,\" than with the religious hope I\nhave more than once expressed, and which is more particularly\napplicable to these times--the dawn of an approaching era:--that by\nthe thorough religious regeneration of the state, and of science, the\ncause of God and Christianity may obtain a complete triumph on the\nearth.\n\n     [20] What a melancholy foreboding is contained in these\n     words!--_Trans._\n\n     [21] Austria.\n\n     [22] Prussia.\n\n     [23] Schlegel here conveys an indirect censure on the\n     Prussian government, for some acts of an intolerant\n     nature towards its Catholic subjects.--_Trans._\n\n     [24] This was spoken exactly two years before the\n     French Revolution of July, 1830.--_Trans._\n\n     [25] Austria.\n\n     [26] France.\n\n     [27] Schlegel alludes to the philosophy of Fichte,\n     which was _an ideal subjective Pantheism_.\n\n     [28] The author here alludes to the philosophy of\n     Schelling, which was more a material and objective\n     Pantheism, not unlike the system of Spinoza.\n\n     [29] This last expression contains, I believe, an\n     allusion to the philosophy of Hegel.--_Trans._\n\n\n\n\n                               FINIS.\n\n\n\n\n                        B. BENSLEY, PRINTER.\n\n\n\n\n                        Transcriber's Note:\n\nFootnotes were renumbered sequentially and moved to the end\nof the lecture in which the related anchor appears. Words in\nitalics are surrounded by underscores, _like this_.\n\nThe items listed below were considered printer's errors and were\ncorrected as noted. Obsolete and archaic words and other spelling\nerrors were not changed.\n\n  Unprinted periods were added at end of sentences and abbreviations.\n  deleted duplicate 'being' ... hope of being able ...\n  'Seuvi' to 'Suevi' ... those of the Suevi and the Saxons,...\n  'vegetion' to 'vegetation' ... and blooming vegetation spread ...\n  'Asyrian' to 'Assyrian' ... the Assyrian Venus ...\n  'decended' to 'descended' ... light had descended ...\n  capitalized 'Latin' ... barbarous Latin,...\n  'and' to 'a' ... firmly to establish a new model society ...\n  moved comma inside close parenthesis ... of despotism,) will ...\n  'goverment' to 'government' ... the Christian government ...\n  two instances of 'Charlemange' to 'Charlemagne'\n  'constition' to 'constitution' ...peculiar nature and constitution ...\n  'aud' to 'and' ... and so active was their ...\n  'Christain' to 'Christian' ... manners and Christian institutions;...\n  removed hyphen from 'party-strife' ... a watch-word for party strife ...\n  'ecclesiastal' to ecclesiastical' ... ecclesiastical excommunication ...\n  'althongh' to 'although' ... although that idolatry,...\n  'inteterests' to 'interests' ... complication of the interests ...\n  'harmouy' to 'harmony' ... aimed at this harmony between ...\n  Footnote [6], added open quote to beginning of second paragraph.\n  capitalized 'Systema' ... Systema Theologicum of Leibnitz,...","title":"The Philosophy of History, Vol. 2 of 2","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":80522}