iiiiiiiiii III
!''tiiiir!iiiiNii!iiii
iitiiiniiiliiillllllililllilllll ||
■■
11
iiiiiiiiiiii
11
ill
II
-.*
N<>
LIBRARY
OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.
Class
n'l
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/examinationofsocOOwallrich
AN EXAMINATION
OF SOCIETY
FROM THE STANDPOINT of EVOLUTION
By
Louis Wallis
CoIumbuSt Ohio :
Xihc Br0us press
COPYRIGHT 1901
By LOUIS WALLIS,
Foreign Rights Assigned.
^0 fatber an& fiDotber
THIS BOOK
IS LOVINGLY INSCRIBED
PREFACE.
THE general thesis of this book was first published
in a prospectus distributed in April, 1901. The pro-
spectus is necessarily a mere sketch, omitting all
development of details. A brief, but more satisfactory,
presentation was made in the American Journal of Soci-
ology, for May, 1902, in a paper entitled "The Capitali-
zation of Social Development." That paper is a condensa-
tion of the work now published.
The book attempts to bring the doctrine of social evo-
lution more definitely into relation with facts established
by the newer treatment of history and life. The nine-
teenth century accumulated a greater mass of knowledge
about human society than had been possessed in any pre-
vious age. Scientific research flung out into bold relief
the fact that present-day civilization is the outcome of an
unfinished growth-process which began on the levels of
animality long before the times of written history. The
remains of prehistoric ages, buried in ascending order
in the soil of the continents, were extensively studied,
with impressively uniform results wherever the investi-
gation was carried. The sources of history, from ancient
to modern times, were critically sifted. Altogether,
through the labors of an army of inquirers, an immense
mass of material has been accumulated, not only in im-
mediate connection with the study of history and pre-
historic archaeology, but along with the pursuit of in-
vestigations into the customs, manners, and arts of the
lower races, the facts of human and animal psychology,
and the action of the earth's physical forces. This ma-
terial, however, is largely undigested. It affords a promis-
ing field for the inductive organization of knowledge about
\
6 PREFACE.
society; but in large part tlie field lies fallow. To be
more specific, the doctrine of evolution, as applied to
human society, has thus far given us a gross map of a
territory, a standpoint from which to approach^ the sub-
ject; but it has not opened up sufifiiciently concrete views
of social phenomena, nor given us a practical and in-
timate idea of the facts. Dazzled by the achievements of
evolutionary science, we are prone to think the whole
story has been told. The great fact of development having
been brought into relief, we have tended to accept the fact
without pausing to ask what have been the actual condi-
tions under which this vast upward movement of hu-
manity has taken place. This book, as already suggested,
is published in the belief that materials now at the dis-
posal of sociological investigators lend themselves to a
more positive treatment than they have yet received.
In attempting to give a more definite and concrete
form to the doctrine of social evolution, the present work
lays down a proposition whereof the validity is to be
tested, not by prejudice, but by the logical methods of
science. We are not entirely sure about the value of our
thesis. No new facts are brought forward; but an at-
tempt is made to apply to facts already established what
is thought to be, on the whole, a new interpretation. To
the general student, educated according to present stand-
ards, it is safe to say that our thesis will come with all
the force of a novel proposition. If it appeal to the
scholar, he will cautiously add the conception to his in-
tellectual outfit.
Our examination involves a sweeping survey of social
development, commencing on the levels of prehistoric
animality, and passing up through the great his-
toric civilizations that have contributed to the world's
higher progress. The general thesis indicates what we
conceive to be one of the most important factors of social
evolution. The reader may be assured in advance, how-
ever, that we identify this principle with only a small part
of social science. The danger is ever present of erecting
PREFACE.
Special principles into complete philosophies; and as we
have emphasized this in the text, there is no need for
special stress upon it here.
The application of the main thesis to universal his-
tory involves an inquiry into the decline and fall of the
earlier historic civilizations. The line of human progress
has, indeed, passed up from prehistoric beginnings
through the ancient oriental and classic worlds into
modern western society. But the ancient civilizations, de-
spite their progress, did not endure; and the wrecks of
many nations lie along the path of social development.
Some of the later institutions of progressive society have
issued from the struggles of earlier historic societies with
the problem of their decline and fall; and if our inquiry
should ignore the retrogressive aspects of human history
we should be embarrassed in the treatment of these later
institutions. Social development, as revealed by universal
history, is not only a struggle for progress, but a struggle
against retrogression.
Modern historical criticism shows that the decline
of ancient oriental society coincided with the rise of
Judaism upon the wreck of an earlier Semitic heathenism.
The decline of classic civilization, in its turn, coincided
with the rise of Christianity upon the basis of Judaism.
Our treatment of the decline and fall of the earlier his-
toric nations turns upon the rise of these two great reli-
gions. In other words, this inquiry carries us into the
fascinating and absorbing fields of Old and New Testa-
ment history and criticism. The relevancy of this part of
our work will be apparent to the scholar. To the mind
still possessed by the idea that life is composed of a num-
ber of distinct "worlds," or "departments," this will seem
at first like an unwarranted digression. We do not, how-
ever, touch upon the problems of Biblical research with
the aim of pronouncing upon them from conventional
standpoints. With the validity of religious doctrines a
work on sociology can have nothing to do, for a discussion
of the absolute content of the realities with which
PREFACE.
sociology deals carries us at once out of the domain of
sociology. The right of sociology to deal freely from its
own standpoint with our sacred literature needs to be em-
phasized.
The modern school of Biblical criticism is un-
doubtedly engaged in a successful application of the same
scientific principles that have been brought to bear upon
history at large. But if certain positions advanced in
this book are valid, Biblical criticism has not been brought
so fully into line with scientific research as it might.
Men like Wellhausen, and Robertson Smith, and Cheyne
adhere to many conclusions based on the most rigid scien-
tific grounds; but it presently becomes evident that they
are, after all, preoccupied by an apologetic religious
interest. This interest may be more subtle than
in the case of more orthodox and less heretical
men; but it is there nevertheless; and at a cer-
tain point in their work its influence begins to
run counter to their own scientific principles. It seems
to us that the critical school has not sufficiently utilized
the sources, both inside and outside the Bible, which are
available to the investigator. The general result of Bib-
lical criticism has been toward the assimilation of the his-
tory of Israel with the growth of society at large. Some-
times this assimilation is complete; sometimes it is par-
tial. The defects in the critical process hitherto, as we
see them, result from the fact that as a rule Biblical
scholars lack the sociological standpoint. This indeed is
inevitable. Criticism of our sacred literature is only a
part of the wider critical movement which has subjected
the world's literature to the rigid test of scientific prin-
ciples; and this critical movement is itself a necessary
antecedent of scientific sociology.
One of the most epoch-making discoveries ever made
is, that the social world in which we live is itself an object
of scientific investigation. Human society constitutes the
subject-matter of a general science. Like other sciences —
and more than many of them — sociology, the science of
PREFACE.
society, has been only partially worked out. This fact,
however, should no more count against sociology than
against physics or biology. The science of society, like
other sciences, deals with phenomena. It makes no effort
to break outside the charmed circle of phenomena; for
if the sociologist should do that he would be lost in the
metaphysician. Sociology is the crown of all the sciences.
It comprehends, and also transcends, the special social
sciences like politics, economics, and ethics. The social
sciences are in themselves nothing. They deal only with
abstractions from the reality which is common to them
all. Sociological training is the necessary summation of
all the experience that prepares for the most intelligent
work in philosophy.
It is believed that the general conception of this work
furnishes a practical sociological discipline of great im-
portance. It helps to show what the science of society is ;
and it emphasizes that the special social sciences deal with
phases of the reality common to them all.
The book itself is an examination of society; but it
does not try to formulate a definition of society. It is a
treatise on sociology; but it does not try to formulate a
definition of sociology. It assumes that we need experi-
ence of society and sociology more than precise defini-
tions of either. It is willing to let definitions grow out
of experience, without trying to churn experience from
definitions born out of due time.
We have tried to produce a text which will be in-
telligible not only to scholars, but to non-technical read-
ers. This, however, not without misgivings. Generally
speaking, a new thesis ought to be presented first in tech-
nical form to the experts who are qualified to pass judg-
ment on it. This condition has been partly complied
with by the publication of the paper noted above. As a
plain matter of fact, if a book of this nature obtains any
recognition from competent authorities, it is sure to come
into the hands of non-technical readers. People of in-
telligence, who need a guidance in sociology which has
10 PREFACE.
either not been available, or of which they are not in-
formed, are now reaching forth for books from which they
get more harm than good ; and we have tried to adapt our
treatment with these facts in mind.
We should like to acknowledge the guarded encour-
agement given to our enterprise by Professor Albion W.
Small, of the University of Chicago. His kindly interest
has been a stimulating influence.
August, 1903. L. W.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
PRELIMINARY SURVEY.
(Pages 19-28.)
The scientific doctrine of evolution as applied to human society.
Bird's-eye view of the course of world-history, from primeval savagery
and animality up through the oriental, classic, and western civilizations
into modern society.
CHAPTER II.
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE.
(Pages 29-37.)
The scientific proposition that the original state of mankind was
that of savagery and animality, unrelieved by progress in the industrial
arts. Proofs and implications of this proposition. Primeval men neces-
sarily scattered over the earth in small and hostile groups. Large societies
impossible, since men possessed neither the material tools nor the knowl-
edge whereby to develop the resources of nature.
CHAPTER III.
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS.
(Pages 38-46.)
Rough Stone Age. Smooth Stone Age. Early Metal Age. Discovery
of fire. Domestication of animals. Saving of seed for planting. Social
effect of early industrial progress. Prehistoric family groups and clans
fuse into tribes. Tribes into nations. Nations into affiliated groups.
Early stratification of growing social bodies into two principal classes^
upper and lower. The tremendous fact of social cleavage into upper
and lower classes. A necessary outcome of prior conditions, and a
step in human progress. Cleavage based primarily upon ownership
of the lower class by the upper class ; and later (when society passed
from nomadism to settled life) upon aristocratic land monopoly. Ancient
common property in the soil not democratic communism, but upper
class communism.
11
12 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV.
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
(Pages 47-59)
The integration, or drawing together, of mankind in social groups
of increasing size rests upon the concomitant integration of a huge
mass of material and spiritual capital whereby the resources of nature
are adapted to human needs. Present day civilization based upon a vast
mass of capital in the form of material tools, technical knowledge, etc.
If this mountain of social capital were destroyed, men would be reduced
at once to primeval savagery. Social capital not accumulated by the free
combination of small quantities of individual capital. Social cleavage
into two principal classes, upper and lower, the main factor in the
capitalisation of social development. The significance of cleavage not
realized, either by scholars or by the general public. Cleavage known
as a fact, but not hitherto treated as its importance demands. Society a
collectivism paradoxically developing under the forms of individualism.
CHAPTER V.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION.
(Pages 60-196)
Application of this thesis to the most ancient circle of "tommunitles
that lay in the path of the world's higher progress — the society centering
around the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean, Egypt, Chaldea, etc.
The relation of social cleavage to all sides of ancient oriental life —
political, industrial, religious, intellectual, etc. Paradoxical nature of
cleavage. An instrument of social good and evil simultaneously. The
world ruled by the play of opposed forces. Decline and fall of the ancient
oriental world largely involved in abuses of social cleavage. These
propositions as to both aspects of cleavage illustrated in dramatic fashion
by the history of Israel, a nation which lay at the center and cross-roads
of the ancient civilization here under survey. Early politics and religion
united. The history of Israel a secular history under the guise of relig-
ious history. The origin and social nature of religion. The early re-
ligion of Israel shown by modern historical criticism to have been a
local Semitic heathenism. Israel knew no god by the name of "Jehovah."
This name first composed by a European monk. The true name of Israel's
national god partly given in the fourth verse of psalm 68 under the form
"jAH.^' This name- syllable pronounced as in the word "hallelu-jah."
The full name of Israel's national god to be rendered thus : "yahweh."
Historical reality of the sojourn of certain Israelitish tribes on the bor-
ders of Egypt. Historical reality of Moses. The man Moses a pre-
supposition of Israelite history. The part played by Moses in the escape
of Israel from the borders of Egypt. The god Yahweh not originally
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 1»
the god of Israel. Derived by covenant from the Kenites, a nomadic
people in the region of Mount Sinai, opposite the northeastern border
of Egypt. Why Moses was not invited to the sacrificial meal at Mount
Sinai. The economic basis of all these movements. The covenant be-
tween the Israelites, the Kenites, and Yahweh, interpreted by the social
consciousness as the choice, or election, of Israel, by the god Yahweh.
Attack of the allied Israelites and Kenites, under the assumed leadership
of Yahweh, upon the land of Canaan. This movement plainly an eco-
nomic movement arising from the needs of Israelites and Kenites. The
Kenites partly absorbed into Israel. The partial nature of the so called
"conquest of Canaan" by Israel revealed in Judges 1 : 27-36 and numer-
ous other sources. The vast importance of social cleavage as a fact in the
social history of Israel. The Israelite invaders unable to take the Canaan-
ite cities. The subjugation of the Canaanite agricultural districts by the
Israelites. The Israelites a rustic aristocracy during the period of the
"Judges." Multiplication of alliances and unions between the Israelite
agricultural upper class and the Canaanite city upper class. Gradual-
mingling and reconciliation of the population. Marriage of Gideon, an
Israelite clan chief, with a woman of the Canaanite city of Shechem a
good example of this. Abortive attempt of the Gideonites to found a
kingdom embracing city and country. Final union of Israelites and
Canaanites forced by pressure of the Philistines, Ammonites, and other
outsiders. The centripetal direction of the Israelite kingship from country
to city. Gideon an Israelite clan chief in the agricultural districts. King^
Saul a country aristocrat from first to last. King David marries a
daughter of Saul ; then contracts a union with Abigail, widow of Nabal,
a wealthy rustic landlord; but later in life is identified with Jerusalem,
"the city of David." King Solomon and all subsequent kings, men of
the city. Passage of the Kingship from country to city a sign of the
concomitant passage of economic power in Canaanitish Israel in the same
direction. The political conditions underlying and controlling the rise
of Yahweh from the state of a tribal god to that of a national deity, and
presently to that of an imperial god. Worship of the Canaanite baalim,
or local gods, a sign of the Canaanite element in the mingled blood of
Canaanitish Israel. Gradual contraction upon itself of the upper class
of slaveholders and landowners. Real estate in Israel falls more and
more into the power of city aristocrats and large rustic proprietors..
This largely caused by poorly adjusted system of taxation, which pressed
more heavily upon the country districts than upon city property. Con-
sequent increasing economic difficulties of the less wealthy members of
the upper class. David undertakes a census of Israel — probably to
ascertain extent of taxable property. His son Solomon marks the king-
dom into taxation districts regardless of tribal and clan affiliations.
Division of the kingdom over the matter of taxation at the accession of
Rehoboam. The kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Gradual social decline
of both kingdoms. Gradual idealization of the imagined earlier golden
14 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
age of David and Solomon. Continued contraction of the upper class
upon itself. Concentration of property and of economic power in rela-
tively fewer and fewer hands. Evolution of prophecy, or forthspeaking
on behalf of the divine. Dramatic role of prophecy in this history. The
opinion of the majority of the people that Yahweh had deserted them.
Startling claim of the minority, as voiced by the prophets, that Israel's
troubles were the issue of Israel's own unfaithfulness to the contract with
Yahweh at Mount Sinai. Yahweh had raised Israel to glory in former
times, and conquered every god with whom his chosen people came
in contact. But Israel had served the gods of other nations as well as
the baalim of the Canaanites, the "former inhabitants of the country,"
who were now asserted by tradition to have been driven out by Yahweh.
The great Elijah, or Eli-yah, who declared that Yahweh was the only
"el," or god, for Israel to serve. Marriage of King Ahab of the northern
Icingdom with Jezebel of Tyre. Alliance with Tyre; and erection of
altars to the Tyrian baal. Alliance of Judah and Tyre. Bloody revolu-
tions of Jehu and Jehoash in both Israelite kingdoms, whereby worship
of the Tyrian god was put down, and his votaries were killed in accordance
with the program of Elijah, who desired Israel to "return" to Yahweh.
Jehonadab, the upper-class Kenite Rechabite, who came in from his
home in the rural districts at the time of the revolution of Jehu, to
associate with the usurping king and see his "zeal" for Yahweh. Soci-
ological basis for the assimilation of "righteousness" with the worship
of the national god of Israel. The claims and program of prophecy
formulated in the rural districts. Elijah a rustic. Elisha, his disciple,
called from the plow handles. Amos a herdsman. Micah a resident of a
■country village in the Shephelah. But in the person of Isaiah, prophecy
at length follows the line of the kingship, and enters the city, to remain
at the center of the social problem to the last. The reaction between
country and city an imperative fact in the history of Canaanitish Israel.
The development of the message of the prophets. The psychology of the
prophets. How Yahweh of Sinai finally became the imperial sovereign
of heaven and earth (in the mind of Israel). Importance of the Baby-
lonish Exile in fixing the religion of Israel in its later, monotheistic form.
The religious contrast between post-Exilic Israel and pre-Exilic Israel.
The social identity of post-Exilic and pre-Exilic Israel. The religion of
Israel transformed indeed from a local Semitic heathenism into an im-
perial, ethical monotheism; but the great social problem, which the
prophets attacked, still unsolved. The prophetic party deceived by the
forms of society, and incapable of understanding the organic nature of
the social problem. Society a collectivism developing, and also decaying,
under the forms of individualism. Futility of the prophetic prescription
of individual righteousness as a solution for the social problem. The
message of prophetism founded upon a vast "post-hoc" fallacy. Evidence
as to social cleavage in the post-Exilic psalms, proverbs, wisdom writings
and apocryphal books. Continued decline of society at the eastern end
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 15
of the Mediterranean. Gradual shifting of the center of historical in-
terest and social headship to the northern coasts' of the Great Sea.
CHAPTER VI.
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION.
(Pages 197-231)
Further application of the general conception to the Greek and
Roman societies. Social cleavage established in the prehistoric period
of classic civilization upon precisely the same basis as in oriental civilization.
The clan aristocracy the original factor in Greek and Roman politics. The
growth of trade and manufacture in the northern Mediterranean exceeds
the industrialism of the ancient eastern world. Rise of the classic "Third
Estate" to economic equality with the clan aristocracy, or patrician element.
Struggle of the patricians and plebeians issues in the enfranchisement of
men upon the basis of wealth instead of upon the more ancient basis
of descent. This change a matter of great sociological importance. So-
ciety now becomes impersonal in its political phase. Along with the
retrocession of ancient family aristocracy, fatherhood ceases to rule and
protect the state. Consequently the social ideal of fatherhood loses its
military character, and becomes more industrial, domestic and lovable.
Profoundly democratic effect of these transformations upon the social
mind. Greece and Rome extend their empire all around the Mediter-
ranean, including the remains of ancient Israel within the circle of these
influences. The social problem of cleavage, however, adavnces to the
same issue in the later civilization as in the earlier civilization. In the
midst of this declining social world Christianity rises upon the foundations
of Judaism, and centers about the person of Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth.
The problem of the psychology of Jesus. The rise of Christianity a later
chapter in the psychology of the prophets. Christianity spreads at first in
the lower social class; but issues at length in a great politico-religious
engine with an aristocratic constitution — the Roman Catholic Church.
Continued decline of the classic world. Final collapse of the Roman
Empire in the West. Influx of the barbarians.
CHAPTER VII.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
(Pages 232-278)
Extended application of this thesis to western society, beginning on
the same level as in the chapters on the oriental and classic worlds. The
plan of history broadens in scope still further. Current misunderstanding
of American history and social development. It represents the efilux of
civilized men and capital upon a vast empire of good, unmonopolized, and
easily accessible soil. American history begins in the older civilizations.
16 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VIII.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — (contifiued).
(Pages 279-318)
The problem of cleavage in western society. England, Germany and
the United States. The great social paradox.
Bibliography 319-322
Index 323f.
ERRATA.
Page 18 (on fly-leaf) : In fourth quotation from A. W. Small,
instead of The concept of "individualism" read The concept "individual."'
The sentence is correctly given in the more extended quotation at page 55.
Page 265: Instead of emigrants read immigrants.
The sociologist maintains that specialism is partialism unless it is
organized into realism. — Albion W. Small, The American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. Ill, p. 167.
The paramount duty of social scholarship at the present moment is to
reckon with the epoch-making fact that to-day's men have gradually
cut the moorings of ethical and social tradition after tradition, and that
society is to-day adrift, without definite purpose to shape its course, and
without a supreme conviction to give it motion. — Idem, The American
Journal of Sociology, Vol. I, p. 567.
Society is ethically bankrupt. We have some ethical assets, but they
are a small percentage of our liabilities. Speaking generally, our ethical
capital consists of a heterogeneous collection of provincial moralities. . .
There is a permanent world's exposition of clashing moral standards. —
Idem, Decennial Publications of the University of Chicago, Vol. IV., pp.
115, 116.
The concept of "individualism" is one of our convenient concessions
to our intellectual incapacity. — Idem, Decennial Publications, Vol. IV,
p. 128.
The individualistic conception of human affairs is not utterly false.
It is a rough, uncritical, inexact exaggeration of a perception which must
be reduced to more precise and proportionate formulation. To-day's
sociology is still struggling with this preposterous initial fact of the in-
dividual. He is the only possible social unity, and he is no longer a think-
able possibility. He is the only real presence, and he is never present.
Whether we are near to resolution of the paradox or not, there is
hardly more visible consensus about the relation of the individual to the
whole than at any earlier period. Indeed, the minds of more people
than ever seem to be puzzled by the seeming antinomy between the indi-
vidual and the whole. — Idem, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol.
V, p. 514, 515.
Doubtless the social' problem has waited longer than it ought for ade-
quate formulation, because many men have believed too implicitly with
Plato that "ideas make the world." Such men have told the story of
history as though it were a ghost-dance on a floor of clouds. They have
tried to explain how spirits with indiscernible bodies have brought about
the visible results. They would not admit that the facts of human asso-
ciation have been the work of flesh-and-blood men with their feet on the
ground. — Idem, The American Journal of Sociology, Yol. V, p. 518.
18
CHAPTER I.
PRELIMINARY SURVEY.
§1. — Modern scientific research brings out into bold
relief the fact that civilization is the result of a process
of growth, or development, which took its rise on the
levels of savagery and animality long before historical
times. This evolutionary process, moreover, still goes on
around us. Whether or not the theory be true that man-
kind have ultimately descended from some lower species
of animal, we must at all events accept the view that man
once lived on the earth without knowledge of the ma-
terial arts, in an animal condition, whence he rose, by a
gradual process of development, into civilized society.
This moderate position — which should always be dis-
tinguished from the radical view — is supported by many
lines of positive evidence, and commands the assent of
all competent authorities. Quite naturally, indeed, those
who hold that historical man is descended from prehis-
toric ancestors who lived an animal existence, are likely
also to hold, as we do, that prehistoric men were, in turn,
derived from a non-human stock. But for the student
of the rise and growth of civilized society, it is practically
sufficient to accept the evolutionary doctrine as more nar-
rowly applied. In other words, unless we are approaching
the study of man from the biological standpoint, we may
ignore the matter of his physical origin, and enter upon
our work at those levels of animality and savagery whence
man has passed upward through barbarism into civiliza-
tion. This narrower doctrine does not affirm that pro-
gress is uniform; nor does it hold that progress admits
of no retrogression. It declares that, on the whole, hu-
19
20 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
manity is a rising, or progressive, race; that some sec-
tions of the race exhibit more progressive tendencies than
others; and that progress tends eventually to become
generalized.*
Although it has been fully shown by many writers
that evolution is a great law of history, a current popular
idea is that conditions in general have somehow gone
backward from an almost perfect state of things — "the
good old times.'' Let it be emphasized, however, that this
idea, opposed as it is to the doctrine of evolution, is per-
fectly natural in view of human psychology and the condi-
tions under which progress takes place. There are at
least two reasons for the vitality of this mistaken view of
life. In the first place, it contains a small measure of
truth. Progress plainly involves losses that are, at the
least estimate, temporary. If we look at progress from a
narrow standpoint, and fail to take a broad view, these
losses assume undue proportions; and a primary ten-
dency of our minds is to look at things from the narrow
standpoint. In the second place, the retrogressive theory
has been a most effective practical stimulus to progress.
In a slowly developing world the existence of a wide-
spread longing to recover the felicity of some fancied
Golden Age in the distant past helps to urge man along
the upward path.
It remains for the popular mind to adjust itself to
the new intellectual atmosphere. Despite the great pro-
gress of the idea of development, it has not yet been
brought home in a practical way to the daily, popular
thought. Looking abroad in the world, it is plain that
while the doctrine of evolution is fully intrenched in some
quarters, it remains within comparatively narrow limits.
It is, indeed, a matter of common knowledge that civiliza-
* The term "evolution," as used in this book, will have the nar-
rower meaning given it in the text, unless we make .specific mention of
the more thoroughgoing doctrine of man's descent from non-human stock,
etc. We use the word loosely as the equivalent of growth, development,
and progress.
PRELIMINARY SURVEY. 21
tion has in some way arisen out of a simpler and ruder
state of things; but this knowledge lies vaguely in the
background of the public mind, and finds little or no ap-
plication to practical questions. Current public opinion
is usually based on discouragingly narrow premises.
§ 2. — Although we must, in this inquiry, assume the
truth of the doctrine of evolution, without special at-
tempt at proof, it may be well briefly to set down here th(j
essential points of the argument for that doctrine as ap-
plied to human society.
First of all, historical records clearly show that civi-
lization has grown up out of barbarism. Following the
course of history backward and forward, we see that there
has been unfolded a series of developmental, or evolution-
ary, steps.
But w^ritten history does not give us the earliest chap-
ters of this great process. It does, indeed, supply more
than we are commonly inclined to admit; but it does not
take up the story at a point that can be in any way dis-
tinguished as a beginning. It breaks in, so to speak, upon
a drama that has already begun. For the purpose of the
sociological student, written history is fairly complete.
It gives the essentials. But in the ancient period it begins
to fail ; the twilight of tradition and myth gathers ; and at
last we are left to grope in the darkness of antiquity.
What, now, is the student of social evolution to do?
Let us turn away from written records for a time, and
look elsewhere. Widely distributed over the world — in
Europe, America, Asia, Africa, and in fact wherever in-
vestigation has been carried — are found rude tools in the
crust of the earth. These implements consist of axes, ham-
mers, knives, arrow-heads, scrapers, awls, and other ar-
ticles of stone and metal. Now, we learn nothing trust-
worthy from written history about the nature and origin
of these tools. In ancient Egypt and Chaldea they were
thought to be of supernatural origin, and were used in
connection with religious rites. In Europe, during the
Middle Age, they were commonly known as "thunder-
22 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
stones." It was thought that they fell from the skies dur-
ing storms; and that they had been used in the "wars in
heaven," and afterward thrown to the earth. But there
is now no doubt that they are the tools used by races which
peopled the world long before historical times — prehis-
toric men, who had not wit enough to make and preserve
a written record of their own existence. We have, indeed,
no direct knowledge of this ; but the physical evidence of
it is just as good, and is entitled to as much credit, as evi-
dence that we receive and act upon every day. If, in pass-
ing through a field, we see marks like those made by wheels
and the feet of horses, we never think of doubting that a
vehicle of some sort, drawn by a horse of some color, has
been there before us. In the same way, the existence of
these rude implements, buried in the soil of Europe, Asia,
Africa, America, and elsewhere, taken in connection with
the fact that written history from ancient to modern times
has nothing trustworthy to tell us about them, proves, as
well as anything can be proved from abundant physical
evidence, that the earth was peopled in prehistoric ages
by races of primitive men.
Not until the nineteenth century were these remains
investigated in a thoroughgoing scientific spirit; and the
results are even more impressive than at first appears.
Very much more has been demonstrated than the mere fact
that rude men peopled the earth before the times of writ-
ten history. The prehistoric implements are not all found
at the same distance from the surface. They are discov-
ered at various levels — some higher, some lower ; and in
general are distributed in such a way as to show that all
have not been where they are during the same length of
time. As a rule, those that evidently have been in place
the longest are buried deepest, and are significantly the
rudest of all. These most primitive tools are made of
stone, broken into pieces and brought into shape without
smoothing or polishing. Higher up are found more vari-
ous tools, made with more care and art, more regular in
shape, and finished more smoothly, making better instru-
PRELIMINARY SURVEY. 23
ments for cutting, piercing, scraping, grinding, etc.
Among these later tools we begin to find parts of the
human skeleton; but the bones of man and the smaller
animals do not, as a rule, survive the action of natural
forces. Only the skeletons of larger animals, like the
mammoth and the mastodon, are well preserved. Going
higher, and coming still nearer the surface, the polished
stone implements begin to be mingled with utensils of
copper and bronze. In these deposits the bones of men and
animals are more common. Thus there is an ascent clearly
marked out, beginning with the Kough Stone Age, pass-
ing up through the Smooth Stone Age, and thence into
the Age of Metals. The conclusion is irresistible: Not
only did primitive men exist on the earth long before the
era of written records; but they were at the same time
subject to the law of progress, development, or evolution.
By a study of these remains we find that man's con-
dition in later prehistoric ages was practically the same
as in the earlier age of written history. Presently we find
ourselves driven on to the conclusion that the progress
which took place before historical times was the earlier
aspect of the same progress which has gone forward dur-
ing the times of written records. In other words, prehis-
toric progTess and historic progress are parts of one great
evolutionary movement whereby modern civilization has
grown up from the levels of rudest savagery and animal-
ity. This conclusion is fully sustained by all manner of
research into the history, antiquities, and life of man-
kind. The doctrine of evolution is indeed the only doc-
trine that gives us an intelligible rendering of human his-
tory and human society.
§ 3. — The material for a study of the process of so-
cial evolution is extensive and various.
For prehistoric times we have the remains of extinct
races. These remains are found, as observed above, all
over the world beneath the crust in the same general
order, beginning lowest down with tools of rough stone,
passing upward through deposits of smooth stone uten-
24 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
sils, and thence to metal implements. This material is
now represented by many public and private collections,
and a large body of literature.
It is certain that the prehistoric career of humanity
extended over a mucli longer stretch of time than the
period embraced within the few thousand years of writ-
ten history. Nevertheless, progress during prehistoric
ages was so slow, and general conditions w^ere necessarily
so simple, that the essentials of the story of man before
his appearance in the field of history are easily recovered
and briefly told. It is the later and more complex periods,
whereof we possess written record, that demand the closer
attention, and are more difficult to understand and ex-
plain. We are, it is true, disposed to think that the reverse
of this must be the case. At first thought, it seems as if
the prehistoric period, of which there is no written record,
would present greater difficulties to the student than the
age of written history. But in a very important sense, as
Just observed, this is not so. The growth of society, like
the growth of a plant or an animal, is from the relatively
simple to the relatively complex; and life in prehistoric
times was of necessity very simple as compared with life
now. The results of the modern deductive and inductive
reconstruction of early human life and progress are mar-
velous.
The knowledge derived from the study of prehistoric
remains is widened and deepened by a comparative exam-
ination of the lower races now living in the world. These
races are not the degenerates of a high civilization. They
are simply wayside survivors from prehistoric times, hav-
ing made various degrees of progress, and then stopped
or slightly retrograded ; and a study of their customs, in-
dustries, languages, and traditions is of great importance
to the social student. We now have at our disposal an
immense mass of information relating to the more back-
ward races in all parts of the world. This material would
justly be open to suspicion if it were more limited in quan-
tity and of merely local scope. But it is of great extent,
PRELIMINARY SURVEY. 25
and has been accumulated by the independent observa-
tions of thousands of travelers and missionaries in all
parts of the world ; and a comparative study of it reveals
the operation of the same tendencies everywhere.
For study of the historical period we have written
records, which carry the view forward from ancient to
modern times. These records are of the most diverse char-
acter, from inscriptions on stone or metal, giving some
detail of local import, to written and printed dissertations
with a broad outlook over large areas of life. All authori-
tative historical works — like Mommsen's History of
Rome, and Green's History of the English — are based on
a critical sifting of these primary sources.
The social process as it goes on around us at present
can be viewed practically at first hand in its whole extent.
The importance of each class of our material consists
not only in its inherent value, but in its relations to other
kinds of material. Each class throws light on every other
class; and the total value of all the material at our dis-
posal is much greater than the sum of the values of each
particular class.
Altogether, the available sources enable us to recover
the facts of social development in a fairly satisfactory
way — not so fully as we would, but with sufficient cer-
tainty to afford a safe basis for the interpretation of es-
sential facts and principles.
§ 4. — At first glance there seems to be no justifica-
tion for speaking in a general way about the "develop-
ment of society." Whether the outlook be upon the pres-
ent or the past, the field seems to be divided between
separate social groups rather than occupied by anything
that merits comprehensive treatment. But a closer view
reveals a well defined growth-process working out through
universal history.
In order to give our thought graphic points of attach-
ment, let us use a map of the world on Mercator pro-
jection. (See map accompanying text). At the right are
Europe, Asia, and Africa. At the left, North and South
PRELIMINARY SURVEY. 27
America. Here we have an outline of the great stage
whereon the drama of social development unfolds itself.
Now, prehistoric remains indicate that a limited
measure of progress was made in early ages throughout
the entire world.
But while there has been a limited measure of pro-
gress everyT\^here, the higher development of mankind has-
been worked out by a relatively small part of the race.
This higher evolution has been accomplished by three
great historic civilizations, or circles of communities.
The earliest of these to emerge from the darkness of
prehistoric times into the daylight of history was the an-
cient oriental civilization. (See map). This great circle
of communities was located near the eastern extremity
of the Mediterranean sea, and included the Egyptians,
Babylonians, Phenicians, Assyrians, Israelites, etc. Ori-
ental civilization contributed much to the development of
society; but it carried forward the work of progress only
a relatively short distance, and then — as if the task were
too heavy — went into stagnation.
Oriental achievements, however, were not lost. An-
other group of peoples now came into the light of history^
absorbed the culture of the older circle of communities,
and assumed the leadership of progress. This group in-
cluded the races of Greece and Italy. It was located in
the northern Mediterranean lands; and is known collect-
ively as the classic civilization. (See map). Its contri-
butions to the growth of society were great ; but it also at
length fell into stagnation.
And now a third circle of communities emerged from
the darkness of prehistoric beginnings. Arising out of
barbarism and savagery, as did the classic and oriental
nations, these latter communities have expanded in cen-
tral and western Europe, and overflowed into America
and other lands. The largest and most important of the
states constructed out of them are Germany, France, Eng-
land, and the United States. These nations constitute the
center of western civilization. (See map). Successors to
28 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the task of the oriental and classic civilizations, and heirs
of their achievements, the nations of the west are in the
forefront of human progress.
Thus there come gradually into view the gigantic out-
lines of an evolution which has no local boundaries, and
ever tends to include the world. In studying universal
history, then, we must —
First — conceive of the entire prehistoric world as
making various degrees of progress from animality. And
we must —
Second — picture the majority of the races of man-
kind as halting at various way-stations along the path of
social growth, taking up, as it were, a waiting attitude,
while —
Third — the more progressive minority embraced in
the oriental, classic, and western civilizations vicariously
works out that economic, political, and intellectual cul-
ture which is today being generalized over the earth.
From this preliminary survey we pass on to a closer
study of the field here marked out. Our inquiry will at
first have to do with the prehistoric world in general.
Then, after stating our main thesis, we shall narrow the
scope of our survey to the first great historic civilization
— the oriental, — passing thence through the classic
world, and thence onward into our own western society.
CHAPTER II.
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE.
§ 5. — If civilization is the outcome of an evolution-
ary process which began on the levels of animality, it fol-
lows that early prehistoric men must once have lived the
life of animals. In this chapter we shall try to obtain a
clear idea of what that life was. As previously observed,
we are able to trace the course of man's life backward
through the Age of Metals and the Smooth Stone Period
into the time when he used only rough implements of
stone and wood. Below this latter point all physical evi-
dence is lacking. Now, it makes no vital difference to
the argument of this book whether man began his career
on or below the level of the early stone age. But in the
interests of clear thinking, it is well for us to push the view
backward to a time slightly anterior to that period, and
begin with man before he had learned to fashion tools.
If it be objected that under such conditions man would
not have been distinguished from the higher apes, and
would not have been man at all, the answer is that this
point is immaterial in the present connection. By carry-
ing the view backward to the extreme limit, and try-
ing to represent to ourselves how a creature like man
would have lived in the pre-stone age — by doing this, we
are able to set the total results of human progress in
bolder relief against the background of nature, and hence
to obtain clearer inital conceptions of our subject. The
principle to be developed is the same whether we begin
with man in the primitive stone age, or in the earlier time
that preceded the first era of material progress.
29
30 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
§ 6. — Great social bodies were impossible in early
prehistoric times for at least two good reasons :
First — the precarious food supply which is always
offered by uncultivated nature;
Second — human ignorance about how to make ar-
tificial use of nature.
Under such conditions it was plainly impossible for
large numbers to associate in one locality. On this point
we may cite some interesting observations by Mr. Lewis
Morgan, a careful student of Indian life, who was adopted
into the Seneca tribe. The passage to be reproduced re-
fers to a higher plane of existence than is here to be con-
sidered; but for that reason it applies with even more
force.
"Numbers within a given area were limited by the
amount of subsistence it afforded. When fish and game
were the main reliance for food, it required an immense
area to maintain a small tribe. After farinaceous food was
added to fish and game, the area occupied by a tribe was
still a large one in proportion to the number of the people.
New York, with its forty-seven thousand square miles,
never contained at any time more than twenty-five thous-
and Indians, including with the Iroquois the Algonkins
on the east side of the Hudson and upon Long Island, and
the Eries and Neutral Nation in the western section of the
«tate" (1).
The conditions which underlay the dispersal of the
Indians over a wide territory applied with far more force
to primeval men, who had made little or no material pro-
gress. It was necessarily impossible for large social
groups to be formed in the early prehistoric age, since the
food supply was precarious and the material arts were
unknown.
§ 7. — But while we are sure that primeval men must
have been widely scattered, it is absolutely certain that a
small measure of association obtained among them. The
profound significance of kinship ties in the early history of
all races proves that early social connections must have
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 31
been based, not on the accidental association of individu-
als, but mostly on some form of blood-relationship. The
testimony of history and ethnology is reenforced by that of
animal and human physiology. The care of the young was
at least as necessary among primeval men as it is with the
higher animals; and as a matter of logical inference it
was even more necessary. This fact, of course, involved a
family life of some kind. Wholly aside from such a con-
sideration, the advantages of a limited cooperation for de-
fense and offense could not fail to be manifest. The earli-
est social ties known to man, then, were those of the pre-
historic family group. These groups would naturally hold
together up to the point permitted by the available food
supply.
§ 8. — The earliest records and traditions of all civ-
ilized races tell of great migratory movements; and sav-
ages and barbarians at the present day roam over the
territories whereon they live. It is plain that the small,
scattered groups of primitive men already spoken of could
not, as a rule, remain permanently upon one spot. Ig-
norant of the material arts, and dependent upon the pre-
carious gifts of uncultivated nature, they must have been
forced into the nomadic life, restlessly wandering about
in search of food.
§ 9. — The early records and traditions of all civi-
lized peoples tell not only of migrations but of conflicts
which, in last analysis, resolve themselves into struggles
about the food supply. The facts of savage life tell the
same story. Prehistoric social groups must, therefore,
have been under the necessity of contending with each
other and with the lower animals for the means of sub-
sistence.
We know that natural goods, like water, fruit, and
game, are not equally distributed over the earth at the
present time; and that, simply on what we call "the law
of chances," they have never been everywhere the same.
Consequently the food supply was not equally distributed
over the earth in prehistoric times. The effect of this in-
32 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
equality upon primitive men was increased by those in-
evitable variations in the environment which cause a
drouth here, and a flood there; an unusual quickening of
vegetable and animal life in one region, and a blight some-
where else. Thus it could not but happen that while some
primitive groups were finding enough to sustain life,
others were obtaining little or no subsistence in their ac-
customed haunts ; and it is easy to see that these natural
inequalities, together with human ignorance about the ma-
terial arts, were at the basis of primeval warfare.
§ 10. — The issue of a conflict between two groups
over the possession of an oasis that would accomodate but
one group was necessarily, as a rule, the extermination
of the vanquished by the victors.
If a group obtained food enough to support its mem-
bers there was little or no cause for serious internal con-
tention. All strength would be reserved for coping with
outsiders. But even the condition of internal peace could
not have been steadily maintained. Famines, as we know,
have persisted far into historical times ; they are known to-
day among the more backward races ; and it is not difficult
to form some conception of the effects of a prehistoric
famine. At such melancholy times the stress of the strug-
gle for life must have broken the bonds that held the
primitive group together. Civilized men, crazed by hun-
ger, have been known to resort to cannibalism; savages
more quickly do the same; and we may be sure that early
prehistoric men were no better than savages.
§ 11. — These conclusions may profitably be set along-
side some concrete pictures of the lowest savages
at present living in the world. We cite first the
testimony of Mr. Darwin, whose five years' travels
are recorded in his "Journal of Researches." We
should notice particularly that the people described
are scattered and nomadic; that they are very ig-
norant of the material arts; that the groups are often
compelled to fight among themselves ; that these fights are
in relation to the food supply; and that scarcity of food
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 33
leads to cannibalism. The passages quoted refer to the
Fuegians of South America.
"While going one day on shore near Wollaston Is-
land, we pulled alongside a canoe with six Fuegians.
These were the most abject and miserable creatures I any-
where beheld. . . . These poor wretches were stunted
in their growth, their hideous faces bedaubed with white
paint, their skins filthy and greasy, their hair entangled,
their voices discordant, and their gestures violent. . .
At night, five or six human beings, naked and scarcely pro-
tected from the wind and rain of this tempestuous climate,
sleep on the wet ground coiled up like animals. When-
ever it is low water, winter or summer, night or day, they
must rise to pick shell fish from the rocks ; and the women
either dive to collect sea-eggs, or sit patiently in their
canoes, and with a baited hair-line without any hook, jerk
out little fish. If a seal is killed, or the fioating carcass
of a putrid whale discovered, it is a feast; and such mis-
erable food is assisted by a few tasteless berries and fungi.
They often suffer from famine: I heard Mr. Low,
a sealing master intimately acquainted with the natives
of this country, give a curious account of the state of a
party of one hundred and fifty natives on the west coast,
who were very thin and in great distress. A succession of
gales prevented the women from getting shell-fish on the
rocks, and they could not go out in their canoes to catch
seal. A small party of these men one morning set out^
and the other Indians explained to him that they were go-
ing on a four days' journey for food; on their return Low
went to meet them, and he found them excessively tired,
each man carrying a great square piece of putrid whale
blubber with a hole in the middle, through which they
put their heads. ... As soon as the blubber was
brought into a wigwam, an old man cut off thin slices,
and muttering over them, broiled them for a minute, and
distributed them to the famished party, who during this
time preserved a profound silence. . . . The different
3
34 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
tribes when at war are cannibals. From the concurrent,
but quite independent evidence of the boy taken by Mr,
Low, and of Jemmy Button [a Fuegian, who had been
taken by the Darwin party, and had learned some Eng-
lish], it is certainly true, that when pressed in winter by
hunger, they kill and devour their old women before they
kill their dogs ; the boy being asked by Mr. Low why they
did this, answered, "Doggies catch otters, old women no."
[That is, the dogs were more useful than the old women,
and hence were spared longer]. . . . Horrid as such a
death at the hands of their friends and relatives must be,
the fears of the old women, when hunger begins to press,
are more painful to think of; we are told that they then
often run away into the mountains, but that they are pur-
sued by the men, and brought back to the slaughter-house
at their own firesides. . . .
The different tribes have no government or chief; yet
each is surrounded by other hostile tribes, speaking differ-
ent dialects, and separated from each other by a deserted
border of neutral territory: the cause of their Avarfare
appears to be the means of subsistence. Their country
is a broken mass of wild rocks, lofty hills, and useless
forests; and these are viewed through mists and endless
storms. The habitable land is reduced to the stones on
the beach; in search of food they are compelled unceas-
ingly to wander from spot to spot, and so steep is
the coast that they can only move about in their wretched
canoes. . . .
The perfect equality among the individuals compos-
ing the Fuegian tribes must for a long time retard their
civilization At present, even a piece of cloth
given to one is torn into shreds and distributed; and no
one individual becomes richer than another. ... I
believe, in this extreme part of South America, man ex-
ists in a lower state of improvement than in any other
part of the world" (2).
Crossing the South Pacific Ocean into Australia, we
find savage tribes but little more advanced in culture than
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 35
the Fuegians. We cite now from Professor KatzePs work
on the races of mankind.
"It is impossible to understand the Australians apart
from their extensive nomadism, to which all the natural
qualities of the land contribute. At the bottom of it lies
the deficiency of water, and the unequal distribution of
food, plants, and animals which partly results from this.
The dry season causes a large number of places otherwise
favorable to habitation to be simply impossible. But
since, owing to the almost total absence of mountains to
feed the springs, permanent drought is no less great than
the time and amount of rainfall are incalculable, there are
few permanent oases, and the arrivals of damp monsoons,
few and far between as they are, are an insufficient check
to nomadism. Vegetable food-stuffs are often to be sought
for at great distances, while animals avoid the dry regions
almost as much as men. Thus the lack of mountains and
large rivers over the largest part of the country makes
for migration, and if we further regard its isolated posi-
tion, the conditions of Australia are as unfavorable as we
can conceive for the development of a settled population.
Thus the nomad tribes of the west go about, the men with
their weapons in front, the women with the baggage and
children in the rear. . . . The length of stay depends
upon the quantity of food, water, and other conveniences ;
but even so they seldom remain in one place longer than a
fortnight, owing to the pressure exerted by other groups.
. . . One can hardly speak of agriculture among the
Australians, only traces of it have been observed. . .
The prohibition to dig up seed-bearing food-plants after
the flowering is merely the necessary result of ever-immi-
nent famine. It is a long step from this to their preserva-
tion and increase by cultivation. . . . The life of the
Australian native afforded little room for industrial ac-
tivity. . . . Infanticide was and is very widespread,
and in any case the number of births is out of all propor-
tion to that of the children who survive. . . . Nature
being for the most part unpropitious, renders dispersion
36 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
compulsory ; but, at the same time, knits the bonds of the
family group closer. This favors a high degree of isola-
tion, which imparts to the life of a community a repub-
lican or quasi-federative character. Every family group
has its elective chief (3).
These quotations could be multiplied indefinitely.
Study of the most primitive races now living in the world
carries us far back to what must have been the condition
of early prehistoric men generally.
§ 12. — A favorite line of thought with those who lean
toward one style of theological reasoning is, that a kind
Providence fitted the earth for man, and that each indi-
vidual has but to take his seat at "the Father's table."
Thus, Mr. Henry George compares the earth to an ocean
steamship wiiich has been amply stocked with food for
its long voyage.
But it needs to be emphasized at the outset that men
have not grown up in a physically hospitable world. The
comparison of the earth to a steamship on which all the
passengers have easy access to all the food, clothing, and
shelter they need is too far fetched; and this line of
thought cannot help theology in the end. Primeval men
had certain physical needs; and the earth, like a well-
stocked ocean steamship, undoubtedly contained enough
and more than enough, in some form, to satisfy all the
needs of w^hich its "passengers'' were conscious. But
these ancestors of ours possessed neither the knowledge,
the vast material outfit, nor the wide social organization
and cooperative training necessary to the development of
the resources of nature. And thus, although the earth's
resources were ample in themselves, yet, relatively to man,
these same resources were limited. Practically speaking,
so far as primitive man was concerned, most of these
abundant natural goods might as well have been located
on the moon.
§ 13. — Summarizing the results of the studies illus-
trated by this chapter, the following propositions may be
laid down as having the sanction of science :
THE PRIMITIVE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 37
Men were once ignorant of the material arts.
Nature, untouched by the hand of art, yields an uncer-
tain subsistence alike to man and beast.
As a rule, early prehistoric men lived in small, scat-
tered, family groups.
These primitive groups were nomadic.
The conditions of existence necessarily brought prim-
itive groups into hostile collision with each other and with
the lower animals.
The essence of these propositions can be expressed in
a single sentence as follows: Men once lived an animal
life, scattered over the earth in small wandering groups,
depending for food upon a precarious natural supply, and
fighting with the lower animals and with each other for
the means of existence.
Against the dark background of the primeval world
looms the great process of social evolution whose begin-
nings we shall study in the next chapter.
(1)— Morgan, Ancient Society, (N. Y., 1878), p. 111.
(2) — Darwin, Journal of Researches (London, 1894. Ward, Lock,
and Bowden), pp. 213, 214, 215, 228. Cf. Ratzel, History of Mankind
(London, 1897. Butler's trans.), II, p. 84ff.
(3)— Idem (London, 1896), I, pp. 347, 348, 363, 365, 377.
CHAPTER III.
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS.
§ 14. — Eising slowly above the animal condition, men
learned how to fashion rough tools of wood and stone,
then utensils of polished stone and more carefully pre-
pared wood, and at length implements of metal. Mean-
while they became expert in hunting and fishing, acquired
the use of fire, and domesticated some of the lower ani-
mals. Before the dawn of history, men also learned to
save seeds for planting, and thus laid the foundations of
agriculture.
§ 15. — In studying the primitive struggle for exist-
ence we saw that, simply on what we call "the law of
chances," natural advantages were unequally distributed
over the world in prehistoric times, just as they have been
during all history, and just as they are today. Moreover,
we saw that this unequal distribution of natural goods
was necessarily at the root of much prehistoric warfare.
Bearing these considerations in mind, we must now ob-
serve the effects of early material progress in the midst
of the primitive struggle for existence.
Throughout all recorded history mankind have not
everywhere achieved progress in the material arts at the
same rate. Some have shot ahead ; and some have lagged
far behind. In harmony with these facts, and simply on
what we call "the law of chances," we know that the be-
ginnings — the prehistoric steps — of material progress
could not have been equal the world over. Primitive
groups in one region advanced more rapidly in the arts
than those in another. One of the first effects of material
38
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS. . 39
progress Avas, therefore, to make more conspicuous the
prior inequality of natural conditions.
This increased inequality operated, in turn, to in-
crease the range and extent of warfare. The less fortunate
would inevitably combine, and press upon the more for-
tunate in the proportion that differences obtained between
their material conditions.
But while progress thus increased the total amount of
warfare, it paradoxically operated at the same time to
increase the sum total of peace. For, although it intensi-
fied the competition between groups, it secured, by the in-
creased food supply, the enlargement of all groups through
the affiliation of smaller gToups and the reduction of in-
fanticide. The number living at peace with each other
within group limits was thus greater, even though the
groups themselves were more liable to war than their
earlier and smaller predecessors.
Material progress, then, —
Increased the inequalities naturally obtaining be-
tween social groups; and thus —
Increased the range and extent of warfare; but at
the same time —
Increased the sum total of peace by providing an eco-
nomic basis for the affiliation of smaller groups and the
reduction of infanticide.
§ 16. — But in a still profounder and more dramatic
way did material progress change the direction of the
forces operating upon mankind. Primeval warfare was a
struggle for extermination; but material progress gradu-
ally transformed war into a struggle for domination. Let
us carefully notice the situation here developing, for it
carries us upward, by a direct and simple route, through
the darkness of prehistoric times into the light of ancient
history.
Progress in the material arts endowed labor with the
power of producing a surplus over immediate needs. In
fights, the victors, instead of slaughtering the vanquished
indiscriminately, as hitherto, now began to spare life, and
40 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
to enslave the vanquished. Along with the rise of slavery
came the rise of a ruling and owning class — for the one
implies the other. In the struggle for existence — in the
struggle for good locations — the larger, better organized,
and more powerful groups conquered and absorbed the
smaller, thus producing tribal societies with an upper
layer of free families and a lower stratum of slaves. At
length, in place of small groups and tribes, there began to
appear social bodies of national dignity, composed of as-
sociated tribes, permanently settled in favored regions like
the valleys of the Nile, the Tigris, and the Euphrates;
and the curtain had rolled up on the stage of history.
The ancient civilizations come forward through the haze
of myth and legend, out of the darkness of prehistoric
times, with all the marks of their earlier history strong
upon them. They are in possession of rude industrial sys-
tems ; they are engaged in wars of defense and conquest ;
and they are stratified into two principal classes, whereof
the lower is the property of the upper, in substance if not
always in form.
Material progress, then, issued not only in the en-
largement of competitive groups, but in the stratifica-
tion, or cleavage, of these groups primarily on the basis
of human slavery.*
§ 17. — In illustration of some of these propositions
about slavery we draw again upon the great work of Rat-
zel, which authoritatively describes the many races of
* The essential fact to be noted here is simply the stratification, or
cleavage, of enlarging social groups. A correspondent has suggested
that we do not make it quite clear just how cleavage is brought about.
We are not so particular just here to show how cleavage is produced,
as to throw the fact of cleavage itself into relief. We have observed
in the text that material progress endowed labor with the power of
producing a surplus over immediate needs, and so led to the replace-
ment of indiscriminate slaughter by capture and slavery. This is the
most abstract possible statement of the case. The concrete involutions
are not necessarily so simple as the abstract statement seems to indi-
cate. The reader should notice this in the course of our survey of the
historic civilizations.
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS. 41
which it treats. The passages reproduced relate to soci-
eties below the plane of modern civilization and yet above
the level of the Fuegians and Australians noticed in the
preceding chapter. We feel like apologizing for introduc-
ing so much quoted matter in connection with this point ;
but, for the general reader at least, it will be well to read
the passages carefully.
"The Masai in East Africa, a shepherd tribe, who sub-
sist upon herds of a fixed size, and have neither labor nor
provisions to spare for slaves, kill their prisoners [of war]
their neighbors, the agricultural and trading Wakamba
being able to find a use for slaves, do not kill them (1)
Nearly allied to slaves are those despised and de
graded portions of the population, who live as a sharply
separated and deep-lying stratum, under a conquering
race. Almost every race in Asia or Africa which has
made any progress toward higher development embraces
some such, not always differing ethnologically. For that
very reason, however, the social difference is all the more
strictly maintained. . . . " (2).
In such cases cleavage into upper and lower strata
is based upon something more than property right in the
laborers themselves. Just here, however, it is sufficient
for the point that we are trying to make, to keep the at-
tention focused upon slavery, in order to simplify the dis-
cussion as much as possible.
"Slavery, which has not much hold among the simpler
[Malay] races, is strongly developed among the "town Ma-
lays" of Palembang, Acheen, and the like. [Note here
again that the more primitive are not so fully stratified
into classes]. It affects prisoners of war, malefactors who
eannot pay their fines, and other debtors, among them not
a few Avho have gambled away their liberty. . . . Ille-
gitimate children, whether the parents are free or slaves
come into this class. As a rule, slaves are treated as mem-
bers of the household, can buy their freedom, and in prac-
tice are not inferior to poor relations who have been taken
into the house for the worth of their service (3).
42 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Class-divisions among the Polynesians are, by reason
of taboo, as sharp as in the most thorough system of caste.
They fall into those which participate in the divine, and
those who are wholly excluded from it. The aristocratic
principle is seldom carried to such an extreme as here,
where a stern psychology remains inexorable even beyond
the grave. In Tonga the native people, in contradistic-
tion to the immigrant nobles, are regarded as having no
immortal souls; while the souls of nobles return from
the next world and inspire those of their own order for
the priesthood, so that the connection of the tabooed [i. e,
the upper] class with the gods is never interrupted. The
boundary between these two classes is not everywhere
alike, though the division into chiefs, freemen, or slaves
runs through all Polynesia. ... Of the men of rank
the greater number are connected by ties of relationship,
the memory of which is preserved by professed genealog-
ists, with the aid of pedigree sticks. The remembrance
goes far back. When the palace in Hawaii was dedicated
none were admitted save those who were connected with
the sovereign in the tenth or some less degree. . . .
In Micronesia, the division into classes is equally into
nobles, freemen, and slaves. The first [i. e, the nobles],
with the priests, are the most influential. . . .
In East Melanesia the classes correspond with the
Polynesian divisions. . . . (4).
Society among the Hovas [in the large island of Mad-
agascar, east of Africa] falls into three classes; the
nobles, the citizens, and the slaves. The nobility consists
mostly of the descendants of former chiefs. ... Of
slaves three kinds are distinguished. . . . The first
are of the same blood as the Hovas. . . . The most
numerous class are recruited chiefly from prisoners of
war; they are slaves in the strictest sense. . . . The
third class are Africans, imported by Arabs mostly from
the Mozambique coast. Since 1877 the slaves have been
nominally [but not actually] free in all parts of the island
over which the Hova power extends. The slaves hold a
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS. 45
somewhat lower position than the other members of the
family ; but may, by the good will of their masters, lead an
existence that many a free man would envy. . . .
The Hovas have become great by the power of the
sword, and hold their power thereby. . . . (5).
In no part of the earth has slavery attained such
vast importance as in Africa. ... Its chief source is
capture in war. . . . Every man bears a chain of some
sort. It is only chiefs' children who are not liable to
slavery Beside the slaves whom the Duallas
put to live in separate villages of their own, as on the
Mungo, and who attend to agriculture, and apart from
their own w^ant of freedom are only a little worse off than
their masters, one thinks involuntarily of the oasis dwel-
lers of the Central Sahara, subjugated by Tipoo, who tend
their lords' date-orchards and share the produce with
them. . . .
The southern basin of the Congo in its interior part
being a part of Africa as little touched as any by European
influences, the observations which have there been made
in great number upon slavery and the slave-trade are of
double interest. Slavery is beyond question universal
there. Even in the Portuguese possessions, where it is
formally abolished, it survives; and the ^working classes'
are still, as of old, recruited by the purchase of negroes
by preference from Mwata Jamvo's country. From the
chief slave markets . . . only a few years ago thous-
ands were going westward across the Kasai; and among
the indigenous races the Kiotos and Bangala are especially
active as traders and leaders of slave-caravans. . . (6).
In Southern Arabia a separation of castes has grown
up of quite peculiar sharpness. . . . As in other Is-
lamitic countries, a distinction is made into Shereefs, the
alleged descendants of the prophet [Mohammed], then rul-
ing families, then Bedouins, who, being fighters, are al-
ways valued more highly than the sedentary peasant popu-
lation. Besides these there are the Akhdams, a term best
rendered by ^disreputable classes.' Many industries are
44 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
despised by the haughty Bedouins, and these the Akhdams
carry on. They are tanners, washermen, potters, butchers,
and are therefore looked upon as tainted, though not so
impure as to communicate impurity to the objects that
have passed through their hands (7).
The social organization of Further India is not so
elaborately bureaucratic as that of China. The great im-
portance of the nobility reminds us of Japan; and in
Cambodia and Burmah we have Indian institutions, of
which there is also a glimmer in Siam. In Cambodia the
royal family stand in the first class, almost a caste ; in the
second are the descendants of the old kings of the country.
Third come the preams, the Brahmins of India, and fourth,
the servants of Buddha. The lowest place is held by the
laboring population, husbandmen, fishermen, artisans,
shop-keepers. These are nominally free, but have to ren-
der service to a lord and most liberally to the state. In ad-
dition there are the slaves, especially numerous in Siam
and in Cambodia, in whose ranks is much of the best
labor-power in the country" (8).
§ 18. — Thus we see that slavery, or property in men,
is today found ever}' where among races that have climbed
above the lower planes of savagery, while falling short of
the levels of civilization. It does not now exist, at least
in outward form, in the highly progressive modern coun-
tries like Germany, France, England, the United States,
and the other parts of western society. But it once pre-
vailed among the forefathers of these peoples ; and as we
have already observed, it was universal in the ancient clas-
sic and oriental civilizations. Before the prehistoric be-
ginnings of material progress, property in men was not a
factor in human life. In the preceding chapter, for in-
stance, we saw that it did not prevail among the ex-
tremely backward Fuegians. The prime condition of
slavery is, that labor be able artificially to produce more
than enough for immediate necessities. When a surplus
appears, along with the early steps of progress in the arts,
then slavery inevitably follows. The institution of pro-
PREHISTORIC BEGINNINGS. 4&
perty right in men originates in the stage of nomadic
barbarism; and it continues in the life of settled races
until their social development passes into higher stages.*
§ 19. — We do not stop just here to inquire into the
moral aspects or the general significance of property right
in human beings, or any kind of property right by which
an upper class is able to exploit a lower class without re-
turning a direct economic recompense. In the present
connection we are concerned, most of all, to emphasize
the inevitableness of property right in surplus-producing
labor at a certain point in social development. This insti-
tution is just as inevitable in the earlier stages of social
evolution as the precipitation of rain when atmospheric
conditions are favorable to it. The ancient civilizations,
with their universal slavery, were oases in the midst of
deserts of savagery and barbarism. The history of every
ancient society records the presence of outside barbarisms
with which it sooner or later came into contact, and
against which it was compelled to undertake defensive and
offensive operations. If the enslaved classes had with-
drawn from the ancient civilizations, and established an
equality and liberty such as that prevailing among the
lowest savages and advocated by some social idealists, the
seceding multitudes would have retrograded toward the
conditions of the primitive struggle for existence. To use
a homely phrase, they would have jumped out of the fry-
* It may be noted here that the so-called "communism in land" prac-
ticed by ancient societies — oriental, classic, and western — was upper-
class communism. Before the advance of material progress had per-
mitted men to increase greatly and form general governments there was
necessarily a large amount of unused land around every community;
and this, together with occupied land, was at first regarded as the com-
mon property of the free upper class. When population increased, and
general governments were established, the upper-class communism in land
passed into upper-class individualism; and the soil was appropriated in
severalty. The conquest of a society like Anglo-Saxon England, living
under primitive upper-class communism, looks, to the superficial modern
eye, as if it were the subjection of Democracy by Aristocracy; but in
reality it was nothing of the kind.
46 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ing-pan into the fire. Collision with an indefinite number
of hostile tribes would have been certain. On the one
hand, the seceders might have been conquered, and either
exterminated or re-enslaved by new masters. Or, on the
other hand, after exterminating a few tribes, they might
have acquired some good territory as a home. But if the
free and equal seceders had the good fortune to go as
far as this, their troubles would not have been ended.
They would now have been compelled to defend their
hardly won possessions against others less fortunate than
they. These hostile tribes, incessantly attacking, either
singly or in combination, would have at length exhausted
the resources of our ancient democracy and enslaved it.
No race ever could nor did work its way up from the stone
age into modern civilization on the basis of equality and
liberty. It would have been simply impossible for free
societies to organize the progress that has led up from the
early prehistoric age through the oriental, classic, and
western civilizations into modern democracy.
§20. — The beginnings of material art in the midst of
the primitive struggle for existence, then, —
Increased the size of social groups, and —
Stratified these growing aggregates into two princi-
pal classes whose relations were based at first upon the
institution of slavery, or property right in men.
Our survey thus far has disclosed a comparatively
simple story; but the plot now thickens.
(1)— Ratzel, I, p. 123.
(2)— Idem, I, p. 124.
(3)— Idem, I, pp. 446, 447. .
(4)— Idem, I, p. 280.
(5)— Idem, I, pp. 464, 465, 467.
(6)— Idem, II, pp. 348, 349.
(7)— Idem, III, p. 220.
(8) — Idem, III, pp. 424, 425. — On slavery and serfdom in general,
cf. Spencer, Principles of Sociology (N. Y., 1895), II, pp. 290-310. Idem
(N. Y., 1897), III, pp. 464-492.
CHAPTER IV.
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
§ 21. — It is well understood by historical students
that slavery was a great step in human progress; but
whatever its merits may be, the consideration of slavery,
or the institution of property right in men, introduces a
much larger subject.
By means of slavery it is plain that an upper class
appropriates the labor products and services of a lower
class without engaging to make repayment. But it now
becomes exceedingly important to emphasize that the ap-
propriation of labor products on this one-sided basis is
brought about by other institutions than that of property
right in men. For instance, if a class engross the land
of a country, and force the remainder of the population to
pay rent for the use of the soil, such a procedure issues,
like slavery, in the absorption of labor products by an
upper class without repayment.
In the previous chapter we learned that social cleav-
age arose during prehistoric times, while society was yet
in the stage of nomadic barbarism. Now, if we examine
the field of history carefully, it becomes plain that one
of the most considerable facts not only of the ancient
civilizations, but of all civilizations down to the present,
is just this cleavage, or stratification, of society into two
principal classes, upper and lower. It matters little what
legal form social cleavage may take. The upper class
may own the lower class bodily — in which case we have
slavery, pure and simple. Or, the upper class may own
the land of a country, the lower class being personally
free, but compelled to pay rent to the landed aristocracy.
47
48 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Or, there may be a combination of slavery and land mo-
nopoly, or a variation of either of these in the direction
of "serfdom." In any case there is a fundamental cleav-
age of society into two classes, the upper appropriating
the labor products of the lower without engaging to make
repayment. The form of the fact may vary; but the
essence, or substance, of exploitation is always the same.
And it is the naked fact of cleavage in abstraction from
all forms of it that we have predicated as one of the most
considerable facts of universal history down to the pres-
ent. If the point is not immediately apparent, let it be as-
sumed while we turn to the next proposition.
§ 22. — We have seen that in the prehistoric period,
while men were engaged in the primitive struggle for
existence, they were necessarily dispersed over wide areas
in small, more or less hostile, groups, like animals. If
we could rise to some elevated point, and take a bird's-
eye view of all history, we should see that one of the most
dramatic features of social development consists in the ex-
pansion and affiliation of these little groups into social
bodies of continually increasing size. Primitive wan-
dering, family groups have been gathered into nomadic
tribes ; tribes, in turn, have coalesced into settled nations ;
while nations have been gathered into great civilized
communities, or groups of nations.
At the outset of this great process of social aggrega-
tion, or integration, imperative necessities, hitherto non
existent, came rapidly to the front. Men were beginning
to live a life unlike that of their ancestors before the age of
material progress. They were being unconsciously drawn
together into expanding social systems by forces they little
understood. They had struck out along the upward path
of civilization ; and as the old, primitive life receded into
the past, they were confronted by a tremendous problem
— or, perhaps better, by a number of problems with a com-
mon element. These problems did not have to be solved
all at once; but, for convenience, we will enumerate a
number of them together. If each expanding social cor-
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 49
poration were to enjoy internal peace, it was necessary
that the most certain possible food supply be guaranteed
for the largest possible number; that strongholds be
erected and equipped; that the products of different lo-
calities be exchanged; that calculations be made and ac-
counts kept; that roads be constructed, canals dug, and
other means of transportation and communication by land
and water provided; and it was necessary, too, that the
religious tendency (which was at first complemental to
politics) find expression through the establishment of
priesthoods and rituals and the building of temples. All
these and other necessities, which arose at various peri-
ods, resolve themselves in last analysis into a general de-
mand for large and increasing quantities of labor products
which take the form of capital. The drawing together of
men into social bodies of increasing size depends largely
upon the transformation of a part of the physical world
into labor products which are not immediately consumed,
but which are transformed into the various kinds of capi-
tal necessary to the development of society.
Looking around us in modern society, for instance,
it is plain that one of the most fundamental conditions
of the civilized contact of large numbers of people is the
existence of capital, vast in quantity and various in form.
Eecur for a moment to the dispersed condition of primi-
tive men. Then consider the amazingly close physical
and intellectual contact of people in modern society:
Farming and village communities outnumbering in the
space of a small county the tribes that once required a
territory equal to New York State. Towns and cities con-
taining their thousands, hundreds of thousands, and mil-
lions. Nations with scores of millions, peacefully touch-
ing borders with each other. A great civilization bound
together by vast systems of transportation and communi-
cation by land and sea, and pulsing with the currents of
a universal commerce both in things and ideas. There is
no feature of this great social system that cannot be shown
4
50 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
to rest immediatelj and vitally upon capital, vast in
amount and various in kind.
We employ the term ^^capitaF' in a broad sense, "ma-
terial" and "spiritual." Material capital is physical tools
— labor products, or wealth — used for the production of
still more wealth from the earth's resources. Spiritual,
or intangible, capital is order, law, social organization,
habits of cooperation and steady work on the part of
large numbers, general and special scientific and literary
knowledge, etc. In order to project the idea of capital into
the boldest relief, it is only necessary to contrast the con-
dition of mankind in, say, England or the United
States, with the general condition of mankind under
the primitive, animal struggle for existence as out-
lined in a previous chapter. Under the former
condition, men were set off like animals against
unimproved nature. There were only two main factors
to be considered: mankind, and the earth under their
feet. In the language of economics there were only two
elements in juxtaposition. Labor and Land. But looking
around us in western civilization, the contrast is tremend-
ous. Although each one of us has neither more capital
nor more knowledge at the beginning of life than had
primeval man, we are all born into a different world. We
do not find ourselves in the midst of a situation which
can be described under the headings "Labor" and "Land,"
or mankind on the one side, and the uncultivated earth
on the other. We grow up in the midst of a world which
contains an immense quantity and variety of capital, or
tools, in things and ideas, according to the definitions al-
ready given. In the absence of capital, we should all find
ourselves in precisely the condition of animals, or of early
prehistoric mankind, as described in our sketch of the
primitive struggle for existence. It is capital that enables
us to live together in civilization and develop the earth's
resources in support of associated human life. So that
progress introduces a third factor, and we have to de-
scribe the progressive world under three captions, Land,
I
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 51
Labor, and Capital, whereof the latter was. at first lack-
ing.
The main proposition just at present is, that the in-
creasing association of mankind which is revealed by his-
tory is founded upon the production of increasing amounts
of material and intangible capital. More formally and
technically stated, the integration of society rests upon a
concomitant integration of capital. It is a familiar fact
that all kinds of undertakings in which we engage have
to be provided with the things, or means, or agencies, for
carrying them through. In brief, all of our undertakings
have to be capitalized. Now, social development as a
whole is to be regarded as the Great Undertaking of his-
tory; and a careful analysis of the situation shows that
the conception commonly applied to the smaller aspects
of life should be extended to the whole process by which
civilization evolves out of animality. Social development
as a whole is a process to which the conception of capital-
ization preeminently applies. If this point is not at once
apparent in all its bearings, let it also be assumed.
§ 23. — These perhaps tedious propositions about
cleavage, integration, capitalization, etc., will now pos-
sibly begin to fall into a logical sequence. The foregoing
treatment has prepared the way for the following thesis,
upon which this examination turns :
Social cleavage is one of the principal factors in the
capitalization of social development*
The advance of mankind from the scattered, nomadic,
animal condition into settled social bodies of increasing
size has rested upon the use of huge quantities of labor
products, both in the form of diverse material capital, and
in the form of immediate support for personal ministers
*We have concluded that this formulation of the main thesis is
better than that used in The American Journal of Sociology for May, 1902,
p. 766. We there used the formula "Social cleavage into upper and lower
strata has effected the capitalization of social development," qualifying
it as on p. 767, 1. 32 f., and p. 794, 1. 24 f., and thus giving it the force
of the statement employed in this book.
52 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
to such intangible social needs as those of order, law, ad-
ministration, general science, cooperative training, organi-
zation, etc. Directly or indirectly, all social necessities
resolve themselves into a demand for large and increasing
capital. This is produced, not by the free cooperation of
"individuals" in the conventional economic sense, but by
a vast, unconscious cleavage within society itself. The
phenomenon of cleavage is cosmic. It appears with the
same inevitableness as the phenomenon of rain when at-
mospheric conditions are favorable. It is not established
as the outcome of any far-seeing human plans. It is the
issue of selfishness, moving on the lines of immediate
pleasure and avoidance of pain, and without anticipation
of good to posterity. Although capital freely takes the in-
dustrial and commercial form during the earlier stages of
social development, the growth of large industry awaits
the accumulation of intangible capital. Thus, the earlier
of the great historic civilizations — the oriental and the
classic — show a comparatively backward material devel-
opment. But western civilization, with its energies freed
from the pioneer work of spiritual beginnings by a rich
heritage from its predecessors, has more promptly turned
its capital into the material form; and within a period
comparatively short, as contrasted with the chron-
ology of the ancient civilizations, has developed a more
balanced social system than the world has ever seen, con-
serving alike the material and spiritual forms of capital.
Everybody who thinks about the subject in a compe-
tent way knows that social development rests upon the use
of large and increasing quantities of capital, and that
without it society would disintegrate (1). But capi-
tal, like air, is such a pervasive commonplace that we are
prone to take it as a matter of course, and think little
about it. Economists have, indeed, given a specialized
attention to capital in its material forms, considered as
a "factor in production;'' but they have looked at it al-
most exclusively in an abstract, a priori way, largely ig-
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 53
noring its actual genesis in their formal treatment.* Eco-
nomic treatises tell us that capital originates in '^the sav-
ing of wealth." Professor F. A. Walker, for instance, in
his Political Economy (Book 2, c. 3), imagines in some
detail the transformation of a rude, poverty-stricken tribe
into a community well stocked with capital, in which man-
ufactures have sprung up, and wherein resides all the po-
tentiality of a modern nation. The illustration is adduced
for the purpose of showing that capital "stands always
for self-denial and abstinence,'' and "arises solely out of
saving." But this is true of actual human society only in
an abstract sense. The average student would acquire a
naive conception of capital from an exposition like Pro-
fessor Walker's. We are correct in saying that capital
originates in the reservation, or saving, of wealth in the
same sense that we are correct in declaring a steamboat
to be propelled by the power of steam. Both statements
are true; but neither statement satisfactorily reports the
truth. The mere knowledge that a steamboat is moved
by the power of steam does not tell us how the thing is
done. Likewise the mere knowledge that capital arises out
of the saving, or reservation, of wealth carries with it no
understanding of capital as a concrete social fact. If the
present interpretation is correct, the history of capital is
but slightly influenced by conventional ideas about absti-
nence and self-denial; and the practical work of social
* In partial qualification, cf. Mill, Principles of Political Economy,
Bk. 1, c. 5, sec. 4 ; Roscher, Political Economy, sec. 45 ; Hadley, Eco-
nomics (New York, 1896), p. 30, where the truth is squinted at, and
passed by. Cf. sidelight in Bohm-Bawerk, Positive Theory of Capital
(Smart's trans.), p. 103, note. Cf. also some clear observations in Mayo-
Smith, Statistics and Economics (New York, 1899), pp. 455, 456; and
in a paper by Mr. Hadley in Volume 9 of the publications of the American
Economic Association, at page 560. A foreshadowing of this conception
is presented by Marx, Capital (New York, 1889, Engel's trans.), c. 24;
but it is not applied to society considered as an evolution out of prehis-
toric anarchy; and the historical treatment is unsystematic and inac-
curate. These drawbacks, however, only reflect the difficulties under which
Marx wrote.
64 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
development in all its aspects is aceomplislied by the use
of huge quantities of lower-class products, appropriated
(or, perhaps better, controlled) under the forms of prop-
erty right by a relatively small upper class whose origins
are almost coeval with the beginnings of higher social
growth. Doubtless the earliest material progress in the
prehistoric period involved individualistic producing and
saving of capital in the conventional sense. Social cleav-
age was not established at a single stroke; and probably
it had to struggle for existence like everything else. Per-
haps the stone age implements represent capital that was
owned by its actual producers. But individualism in the
production of capital is evidently an "unfavorable varia-
tion." Social cleavage arose in the prehistoric period to
compete with individualism; and in the early historic
period we find it everywhere in easy possession of the field.
Cleavage has had the effect of a forced draught on a smol-
dering fire. Historically it has been a sort of cosmic bel-
lows without which the flickering flame of progress must
have been smothered on the lowest levels of culture, and
humanity have perished without a career.
Economists, it may be repeated, have tended to fall in
with the conventional, popular, individualistic view when
thinking and talking about society. While they have often
admitted the invalidity of the individualist philosophy,
their formal doctrines, nevertheless, have been hitherto
controlled by individualism. And this is true not only of
men who, in a professional way, theorize about society,
but of some who would reform society, like the individual-
istic single taxers and the anarchists, whose doctrines in
many respects run counter to those of the professional
economists. The conventional view is, that society is a
crowd of people who come together on an individualistic
basis, produce wealth from the earth's resources, hold back
part of their wealth products for use as capital, add their
capitals together in voluntary associations, etc. But all
this is true only in an abstract sense which hides the real
situation. If our general proposition is correct, society is
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 55
not the result of the free coming together of individuals;
and the capitalization of society takes place in the main
unconsciously, as an unforeseen incident of social cleav-
age.
§ 24. — This brings us to one of the paradoxical cor-
ollaries of our thesis. Capital, although social in its
origin, has been mostly the private property of individuals
from the dawn of history down to the present time — in-
dividuals who are members of, or affiliated with, the upper
class. It therefore needs to be emphasized at the begin-
ning of our inquiry that —
Society is a collectivism, or socialism, developing un-
der the forms of individualism.
The category "individualism,'' as commonly con-
ceived, is invalid in its application to society. "The con-
cept ^individualV' observes Professor A. W. Small, "is one
of our convenient concessions to our intellectual incapac-
ity. In view of our mental limitations, it is doubtless a
necessary device, but there is nothing in the world of real-
ity to correspond with the notion which the term ^individ-
uaP is made to connote in all the individualistic philoso-
phies" (2). The individual is an expression of cosmic
forces acting through himself and his environment.
Whether he is something more than this, and how far and
in what sense the category of individualism is valid in
sociology, it is not within the province of this work to
inquire.*
§ 25. — Some earnest social reformers, whose infor-
mation along certain lines is exceeded by their zeal, seem
* It should be noted that we have not said that individualism is a
wholly invalid sociological category, but only that individualism as con-
ventionally, or popularly, conceived is invalid. We do not doubt that
the conceptions of personal responsibility and free will are, at least foi
practical life, good working ideas up to a certain limit. But the question
is not so much one of fact as of extent. The real problem is. How far
does the significance of individualism extend into the plexus of social
relationships and problems? If the position to which our inquiry seems
to lead is correct, the significance of individualism falls far short of its
conventional boundaries.
56 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
to think that the vast lower class has constituted the
only important part of society; and that, from the first,
it has occupied itself in the development of agriculture,
manufactures, trade, scientific knowledge, etc., — only to
be plundered and exploited by a parasitic and useless up-
per class. This, however, will not do. We are entirely
willing and quick to admit that the upper social stratum
has frequently abused its position, and that in most if
not all controversies between the upper and lower classes
the former has been in the wrong ; but this, instead of be-
ing unnatural, is normal to the evolutionary process, and
in itself constitutes one element of the great social prob-
lem. All truth is paradoxical ; and cleavage, formally the
sign of economic exploitation, is an adumbration, or fore-
shadowing, of the law of service. The fact that the upper
class has often abused its position does not in the least
militate against our thesis that cleavage is one of the prin-
cipal factors in the capitalization of society.
Those who think that society could have been organ-
ized out of animalism, ignorance, and violence on the
basis of democratic liberty and individual rights are
looking at human history from the standpoint of the later
achievements of progress. If we are seeking the plain
truth, and trying to be merely accurate, this is just the
reverse of the standpoint that we should take. Instead of
looking back on human history we ought to look forward
on history from the standpoint of the primitive struggle
for existence. From this outlook another paradoxical
corollary of our main proposition becomes evident :
Individual rights are historically realized hy the ab-
solute dejiial of individual rights.
If social integration rests upon a concomitant inte-
gration of capital which, in turn, results largely from so-
cial cleavage — if this is true, then the paradoxical and
apparently obnoxious corollary follows. For the two
great historical bases of cleavage have been property right
in men and property right in the earth. Both of these are
in denial of the "natural and inalienable'^ right of the in-
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 57
dividual to the proceeds of his own labor and to free access
to those natural resources which have been produced by
no man. If our position is correct, society could not have
risen above the levels of early material progress, and the
smoldering fire could not have been fanned into a blaze,
without the absolute denial of individual rights. When
these rights are finally acquired through modern de-
mocracy and the changes that are inevitably to issue there-
from, it will become evident that they too are capitalized !
§ 26. — The conception of capitalization through cleav-
age is thought to give us a clearer outlook on the facts
of history than we have hitherto enjoyed, and hence to
facilitate the interpretation of society. It is not put for-
ward in a dogmatic spirit ; nor do we claim for it the char-
acter of a complete social philosophy. We regard it as
a contribution to the study of society in the making.
There seems to be a large field over which the principle —
if such it may be called — comes into active operation,
and in which it plays an important part. The conception
draws us into the dust and turmoil of real life. It seizes
upon commonplace facts, and is essentially simple. It
seems to indicate one of the main channels through which
evolutionary forces have differentiated the phenomena of
human association out of anterior orders of reality; and
on all these counts the study of cleavage appears to be a
sociological discipline of great importance.
While we are inclined, then, to claim a considerable
place in the philosophy of history for our supposed prin-
ciple, it is well to emphasize at the very outset, by way of
caution, that it affords only a partial outlook on a large
subject. The danger of erecting special principles into
complete philosophies is ever with us, and is often ignored.
On this point we can do no better than to quote from
Bishop Stubbs :
"Among the first truths which the historical student,
or indeed any scientific scholar, learns to recognize, this is
perhaps the most important, that no theory or principle
works in isolation. The most logical conclusions from
58 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the truest principle are practically false, unless in draw-
ing them allowance is made for the counterworking of
other principles equally true in theory, and equally de-
pendent for practical truth on coordination with the first.
No natural law is by itself sufficient to account for all the
phenomena which on the most restricted view range them-
selves within its sphere'' (3).
In the scientific student of society the statement of
this thesis — if it satisfy his sense of probability — will at
once awaken the desire to see it illustrated in terms of
world-history. On the other hand, the student who ap-
proaches the subject from the standpoint of social reform,
or readjustment, will tend to overleap the past, and inquire
into the present and future significance of the conception.
The latter question, although legitimate, is here out of
order. Bearing in mind the results of the inquiry thus
far, it is now our business to attempt a summary illustra-
tion of our thesis in historical terms. The writer does not
flatter himself that even if his thesis be substantially true,
he can succeed in demonstrating it to the complete satis-
faction of the reader. The most that we can do in this first
attempt is to state the general proposition as clearly as
possible, and to exhibit the leading facts of universal his-
tory in relation to the fundamental phenomena of cleav-
age.
REVIEW SUGGESTIONS OF THESIS.
Prior to the beginnings of material progress men were necessarily
scattered about in small groups, like animals, and not gathered into great
social bodies. Being ignorant of industrial art, they depended upon a
precarious natural supply of food and other necessities. There was
enough in the earth for all. But men had not the tools, the social organi-
zation, the technical knowledge, nor the cooperative habits necessary
to the development of natural resources. In other words. Labor lacked
the Capital which was necessary to the efficient use of Land. Hence the
primitive, animal struggle for existence, wherein the victors exterminated
the vanquished. Natural variations in the environment issued here in
plenty, and there in scarcity. Those who found themselves on the best
locations had to defend themselves against the onslaughts of the less
fortunate.
THE CAPITALIZATION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. m
But in the midst of this primitive struggle for existence, the begin-
nings of material art began to effect a revolution. Rising* above the-
animal state, men learned how to make tools of stone and metal; they
acquired the use of fire; they domesticated some of the lower animals;
they learned to save seeds for planting, and thus laid the foundations of
agriculture. Originally, man was compelled, like the animals, to take the
outer world as he found it, adapting himself to his physical environment
as best he could. But now he learned more and more to adapt his environ-
ment to himself by means of art.
The beginnings of material progress, however, did not equalize those
natural conditions which produce here plenty, and there scarcity. Those
unequal conditions are still in existence. And not only this ; but it is a mere
plain fact of history that material progress itself has never been the same
throughout the world. Some sections of the race have shot ahead. Som&
have lagged behind. The beginnings of material art, then, multiplied
rather than diminished the inequalities obtaining everywhere. Larger
numbers of men were able to live together in social groups; but war
continued , as before. War, however, became less a struggle for exter-
mination, and more a struggle for domination. Material progress en-
dowed labor with the power of producing a surplus over immediate-
needs; and the victors in war, instead of slaughtering the vanquished
indiscriminately as before, now began to spare life and to take captives.
Hence, not only did social groups increase in size; they also stratified
into two principal classes, upper and lower. The upper class appro-
priated the labor products of the lower class, and converted these products
largely into social capital of all kinds, material and intangible. It is true
that the upper and well-to-do classes have been the greatest beneficiaries
of progress thus far ; but this has been no fault of the upper class. The
inevitable reforms, or adjustments, which will distribute the benefits of
progress more widely than at present will necessarily proceed upon the
basis of a huge mass of social capital which has been accumulated
mostly through the institution of social cleavage. Civilization could
arise out of the universal welter of primeval savagery and animalism
only as it has ; and any scientific treatment of history must bring the facts
of history into relation with the phenomena of cleavage.
(1) — Small and Vincent, Introduction to the Study of Society
(N. Y.), pp. 78, 261.
(2) — Decennial Publications of the University of Chicago, IV, p. 128.
(3) — Stubbs, Constitutional History of England (Oxford, 1875), I,,
p. 32.
CHAPTER V.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION.
§ 27. — In studying the process of social development,
we logically turn from prehistoric and barbarian society
in general to the ancient world that centered about the
eastern end of the Mediterranean sea. Oriental civiliza-
tion was the first great circle of communities to come
forward into the light of history, and, upon the basis of
prehistoric beginnings, work out a culture of sufficient
power to propagate itself onward in human experience.
The leading peoples, or nations, of the ancient oriental
world were the Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Phoe-
nicians, and Israelites. The world-historical place of the
ancient East is well set forth by Professor James Craig
in the following words:
^'It is a fact, more and more plainly perceived by
scholars, that among the early peoples who have contri-
buted to the ideas inwrought into our present civilization
there is none to whom we owe a greater debt than we do
to the Semitic family. . . . It is here that we find the
earliest beginnings of civilization historically known to
us — here that early religious ideas, social customs and
manners, political organizations, the beginnings of art
and architecture, the rise and growth of mythological ideas
that have endured and spread to western nations, can be
seen and studied in their earliest stages, and here alone
information is supplied which enables us to follow them
most successfully in their development" (1).
§ 28. — A survey of these peoples as they come for-
ward on the stage of history shows that there was no such
distinction of social structures and functions among them
60
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 61-
as we find in the latest social theory and practice. The
organization of society into definite institutions, indus-
trial, political, religious, domestic, educational, etc., each
having its own special function to discharge and giving its
own peculiar direction to the human life common to them
all — this is a modern idea and practice, and was but
faintly foreshadowed in the life and thought of oriental
civilization. Society develops, like other growing things,
from the simple to the complex, from the indefinite to the
definite; and we should not be surprised to find that the
oriental community was far more primitive, and far less
definite in structure, than the social order in which we
live. This ancient world was indeed much nearer the pre-
historic beginnings than we are commonly inclined to
think. We are often reminded that written history sup-
plies only the later part of man^s life on the earth ; and in
a chronological sense this is true. But modern research
into the evolution of society has made it clear that his-
torical perspective is determined, not by chronology, but
by achievement. Prehistoric ages doubtless embrace a
much longer stretch of time than historic ages ; but from
the standpoint of achievement, prehistoric times contract,
while the ages of written history expand. Comparing the
achievements of historic times with the results of pre-
historic progress, as illustrated by archaeology and the
life of savage and barbarian tribes, it is evident that the
earliest recorded societies are, so to speak, earlier than
they seem to be. The social constitution of the Orient was
primitive because the Orient was itself a primitive society.
Interrogate the ancient East for its own theory of things,
and no great scientific thinkers come forward to make
answer. Egypt had no Aristotle ; Babylonia had no Spen-
cer. Oriental thought was deductive, a priori^ primitive.
Human thought reflects human life.
If, now, instead of trying to discover some complex
plan, or theory, of society whereon our ideas may turn in
the study of the earliest historic civilization — if, instead
of this, we bear in mind the facts and principles outlined
•62 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY,
in previous chapters, the problem will be simplified, and
our task will be reduced to workable dimensions. If the
present interpretation is correct, oriental society is to be
approached primarily from the standpoint of its cleavage
into upper and lower strata. It is here that we seem to
find a comprehensive clue to a practical study of the facts.
§ 29. — First, let us try to mark off the political forces
and institutions, or, rather, that side of oriental life which
corresponds to them. We must bear in mind that the
comparatively undeveloped condition of this ancient so-
ciety makes exact discrimination impossible.
In the light of our modern conception of the state as
embracing all the people of a given territory, and of gov-
ernment as the agent of such a state, it requires an effort
of the imagination to turn backward and realize the true
nature of politics in the earlier ages of social evolution.
In the ancient East, government was a prerogative of pro-
perty in men and in the soil, an incidental function of the
upper class; and there was no abstract idea of the state
at all. In Egypt —
"There existed an aristocracy, the nobility, in whose
hands lay the government of the towns and of the nomes
[provinces] to which they belonged. They sat in the seats
of their ^fathers, the nobility of ancient days,^ and they
present the best example of a hereditary nobility. Their
riches consisted chiefly in landed property, and in their
tombs we see [pictures of] long processions of peasant men
and women representing the various villages belonging to
the deceased'' (2).
"The noble class of the Egyptian people had nothing
in common with the vulgar mob. ... To them were
committed the highest offices of the court. . . . The
nobles held as their hereditary possessions villages and
tracts of land, with the laboring people thereto belonging,
bands of servants, and numerous heads of cattle" (3).
In this respect Egypt was typical of all the ancient
East. The government of society was everywhere in con-
trol of the upper class; and everywhere the upper class
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 63
itself was organized into "clans," "houses," or "families."
In our survey of the primitive struggle for existence we
saw that the earliest social groups naturally formed them-
selves on the lines of the family. In view of this fact there
is nothing strange in the supremacy of the family in the
original politics of all historical peoples. Early aristo-
cracy was invariably the outgrowth of the evolution of
warring clanships which fused into tribal corporations,
and gradually accumulated a lower class of slaves. In set-
tled communities these clans, or families, had been long
established, as a rule. In wandering tribes there were al-
ways military chiefs who were in process of founding
families.
The Israelites furnish good illustrations of houses in
process of formation, and of houses already founded.
Most of the important characters in the Old Testament
literature either belonged to the nobility or worked
their w^ay into it. Whether he be a historical person or
not, Abraham is a good example of the tribal prince. We
are told, in Genesis 14, that he was able to gather and
command three hundred and eighteen slaves (inaccurately
rendered "servants"), "born in his house." Not having
passed from the nomadic to the settled life, he had no
landed estates; and his property consisted principally of
slaves and cattle. Under these circumstances it was a
matter of course that he possessed other valuables, the
products of labor. In chapter 13 we read that he was
"very rich in cattle, in silver and in gold ;" and in chapter
23 we learn that he was able to pay "four hundred shekels
of silver, current money with the merchant," for a grave-
yard. Another person of the same social position was the
famous Job, to whom apply the same observations re-
specting historical reality. In the first chapter of the book
bearing his name we learn that "his substance was seven
thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hun-
dred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she-asses, and a very
great household ; so that this man was the greatest of all
the children of the east." Of course, the personal labor
64 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
of such a man was not the force that purchased, and gath-
ered together, and cared for, the property in his posses-
sion. He was simply an upper-class individual who, by
force of property rights, was able to appropriate the fruits
of the labor of other people.
Social development in its prehistoric beginnings, then,
must be regarded as a scramble wherein the masses be-
come subordinate to property-holding classes who organ-
ize communal control, or government.
§ 30. — As the smaller groups are fused into aggre-
gates of national dignity, the local governments are com-
bined under the authority of a general ruler, or king.
The kingly office is at first elective, but with a tendency
to become hereditary ; and sooner or later it is associated
with the holding of a larger amount of property than is
possessed by any other member of the upper class. Gov-
ernment, then, is at first naturally of limited scope. Later,
as tribes are settled permanently on the soil and formed
into larger communities, general governments are estab-
lished. Local authority is exercised by some member of
the nobility, who is perhaps elected by his peers, or who
perhaps holds his office by right of descent from some
earlier chief. Separate communities occupying any region
of uniform, or fairly uniform, physical characteristics, in
which transportation and communication are not matters
of great difficulty, tend to develop a general government
at an early period. This result, however, is not always
brought about in just the same way. Perhaps the pressure
of invasion forces union for the common defense, the fam-
ily and tribal chiefs electing a leader from their number.
Perhaps the invaders are successful, their leader proclaim-
ing himself as king of all that territory, and apportioning
the soil and its inhabitants among his officers and princi-
pal followers. In either case, whether the invasion is suc-
cessful or not, the communities of such a region are never
afterward the same. The foundations of general control
and affiliation have been laid; and, in spite of drawbacks,
the tendency thus manifested represents a permanent so-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 65
cial force which finds expression in many ways. The king
is merely a well-to-do man of the free families — and some-
times of humbler origin — elevated to royal dignity by
the votes of the upper class.
The masses of the people bear allegiance to the king
only in an indirect way through their local rulers. This
rough constitution, called "feudalism/' tends to prevail
for It time wherever mankind leave the wandering life,
and advance into settled society. The ancient East never
passed beyond it. The student of social evolution who is
fully conscious of the animalistic anarchy out of which civ-
ilization develops, is prepared to see that the character of
early government is of smaller significance than the fact
of government. As Mr. Bagehot has well said, "in early
times the quantity of government is much more important
than its quality. What you want is a comprehensive rule
binding men together'' (4).
A good example of the formation of a general oriental
government in accordance with these tendencies is found
in ancient Egypt. Some suggestions of earlier Egyptian
development are supplied by the orientalist Maspero in the-
following passage:
"We must . . . pronounce the first Egyptians ta
have been semi-savages, like those still living in Africa
and America, having an analogous organization, and simi-
lar weapons and tools. A few lived in the desert, in the
oasis of Libya to the east, or in the deep valleys of the Red
Land . . . between the Nile and the Sea ; the poverty
of the country fostering their native savagery. The
Egyptians, even in late times, had not forgotten the ties
of common origin which linked them to these still barbar-
ous tribes" (5).
It is very plain that the famous people of the Nile
were not united in one state from the first; and that or-
iginally they were split up into many political entities, or
principalities, having little or no connection with each
other (6). In time these principalities were consoli-
5
66 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
dated into two groups, constituting Upper and Lower
Egypt; while the Pharaohs of history, who ruled over a
united Egypt, wore a double crown, symbolical of the sov-
ereignty and earlier independence of the two great divi-
sions of the country. The local principalities represented
the prehistoric tribes or clanships which, in ages past, had
settled there; while the principalities themselves, until
far down in the course of Egyptian history, bore the ani-
mal totem names which had once belonged to the original
clans.
A more familiar and equally good illustration of the
formation of general governments is found in the history
of the Israelites. As previously remarked, most of the
important characters in Israelitish history belong to the
free families of the upper social stratum. Under this upper
stratum lay the lower class, constantly increasing in size.
The free families, or "father's houses," were affiliated in
clans and tribes which conquered the land of Canaan, and
partly subjugated and' partly allied themselves with
its earlier inhabitants. Cleavage was, of course, more
prominent after the conquest than it had been during the
nomadic life of the tribes in the desert. After the set-
tlement of Israel in Canaan the family and tribal juris-
dictions were converted into territorial governments hav-
ing only limited authority. Later a national government
was established by the choice of a king from the free
families of the upper class.
There was no such political life in the ancient ori-
ental world as there is today among the modern demo-
cratic peoples. Oriental monarchies have always tended
to be "absolute." But there were necessarily much pri-
vate discussion and factional difference within the govern-
ments themselves; and the sociologist will appraise this
abused political term, "absolute," at its true value.
§ 31. — It is not easy to indicate just where the gov-
ernmental activities of the upper class merged into its
other functions. At the least, the local and general gov-
ernments did a great deal that government now does.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 67
They actively promoted social peace and order, made pro-
vision for the common defense, constructed roads and ca-
nals, fostered commerce, and set up judicial tribunals.
Let us take another illustration from Egypt.
"The encouragement of trade and commerce, the es-
tablishment and improvement of commercial routes, the
digging of wells, the formation of reservoirs, the protec-
tion of roads by troops, the building of ships, the explora-
tion of hitherto unknown seas — such were the special ob-
jects which the monarchs of the eleventh dynasty [about
3,000-2,800 B. C] set before them, such the lines of ac-
tivity into which they threw their own energies and the
practical ability of their people" (7).
This policy obtained its greatest development in the
times of the succeeding, or twelfth, dynasty, under which,
as Lenormant has observed, Egypt reached its apogee (8).
But sometimes the king's energies were otherwise oc-
cupied :
"A considerable part of his time was taken up in war
— in the east, against the Libyans in the regions of the
Oasis; in the Nile Valley to the south of Aswan against
the Nubians; on the Isthmus of Suez and in the Sinaitic
peninsula against the Bedouin; frequently also in civil
war against some ambitious noble or some turbulent mem-
ber of his own family" (9).
This illustrates again the danger to which every early
settled society is exposed. War was a prominent factoi^
in the consolidation of ancient societies. They were al-
ways being attacked or threatened by communities on the
same level of culture, and by militant tribes of inferior
achievements. Hence they were compelled at the very
least to stand on the defensive ; and they were often forced
to take the offensive, and chastise or subjugate belligerent
outsiders if possible. This fundamental necessity for war
bred a martial tendency which easily passed over into
a habit of war, whether defense were strictly necessary or
not; so that the line between necessary and unnecessary
wars is often impossible to define.
68 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
§ 32. — The subject of governmental supply, as com-
pared with that of government itself, is, for a long time^
of secondary importance. The fact of governmental sup-
port is more significant than the exact source or nature of
the support. In other words, the science of governmental
revenue necessarily remains in abeyance while government
itself is becoming organized and doing its preliminary
work. If we bear in mind the process by which political
union originally comes about, we shall not find it difficult
to comprehend the main lines of primitive taxation.
Large landed estates are connected with the throne at an
early period; and from these are defrayed the ordinary
expenses of the court. In the conduct of war the king calls
upon his nobles throughout the country; and these re-
spond by bringing up contingents of armed men from their
estates. We reproduce a pertinent passage from Mas-
pero :
"The duties enforced by the feudal [Egyptian] state
do not appear to have been onerous. In the first place,
there was the regular payment of tribute, proportionate
to the extent and resources of the fief. In the next place,
there was military service: the vassal agreed to supply,
when called upon, a fixed number of armed men, whom he
himself commanded, unless he could offer a reasonable ex-
cuse" (10).
The operations of local government, on the other
hand, were partly defrayed by the forced labor of the
lower class, and partly by general taxation of property.
Of taxation in detail, however, more later.
§ 33. — In oriental society industry never attained
anything like its modern development. The industrial
phase of social evolution is illustrated more fully by the
economic history of our western civilization; and we
shall go more carefully into it at a later stage of our in-
quiry. In this connection we must be content with a very
brief treatment, partly in the light of oriental evidence^
and partly in view of European experience.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 69
Our survey of prehistoric material progress indicated
that the elaboration of stone tools preceded the domesti-
cation of animals and the saving of seeds for planting.
It is fairly a matter of popular knowledge that shepherd-
ing, or cattle raising, forms a principal occupation in the
nomadic stage of social evolution; and that to this is
added agriculture as one of the major occupations when,
at a still further stage, men have begun to settle per-
manently upon the soil. Now, oriental society, at the
period of its emergence into the era of written records,
had moved up out of the stone age into a period wherein
cattle raising and agriculture were the main industries.
These two great occupations were organized under the
proprietorship of an aristocracy whereof the Old Testa-
ment characters already cited can be taken as examples.
This aristocracy, conformably to the historical order of
material progress just noted, was based originally on slav-
ery; but as society became settled, the upper class natur-
ally appropriated the land — first in common, and then in
severalty.
In studying the industrial phase of social growth we
must, indeed, bear constantly and prominently in mind
the great institution of cleavage, not only as based in its
primary form upon slavery, but as based more and more
upon landownership. We must be careful not to acquire
a merely statical conception of these facts. We must re-
member that slavery precedes land monopoly; and that
the bonds of slavery are not relaxed until the influence of
land monopoly is fully established. Of these two forms of
cleavage, property right in men is historically the first.
Then slavery and property right in the earth are inter-
mingled. Finally, as in western civilization, property
right in human beings is abolished; and the lower class
obtains personal freedom. But by this time the upper
class has largely, or completely, enclosed the soil ; and the
lower class, although formally and legally free, is not ac-
tually free.
70 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
We obtain views of the vast working masses through
the following passages by orientalists. The first is by Pro-
fessor Sayce:
"Slavery was part of the foundation upon which
Babylonian society rested. . . . Slavery prevented
wages from rising by flooding the labor market, and the
free artisan had to compete wdth a vast body of
slaves" (11).
The next relates to Egypt, and is by Professor W. M.
Muller.
"The best part of the population, undoubtedly, was to
be found, not in the haughty scribes and priests . . .
but in the peasants. . . . Most of them were serfs —
of the king, or of temples, or of landowners" (12).
To these passages we may add the quotations already
taken from Erman, Maspero, and Brugsch in connection
with our survey of the political phase. They all show that
at the basis of oriental society was the lower class en-
gaged mostly in the labor of shepherding and agriculture
under the proprietorship of a slaveholding and landown-
ing nobility, the upper class being organized into families,
or clans.
In the midst of shepherding and farming communi-
ties, towns and cities began to grow up everywhere. It is
impossible to show just when these aggregates of popula-
tion began to be gathered together ; but the main facts are
clear. There was necessarily a time in early history when
towns and cities had no existence; a period at length ar-
rived in which they began to come into prominence; and
the causes promoting their development lie all abroad in
the economic history of the world.
Towns in general are inseparably connected with the
growth of commerce and manufacture. Of course, these
occupations take their rise before town life proper has be-
gun; but it is to the further growth of commerce and
manufactures, and their subsequent separation in large
part from the earlier and more primitive industries of
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 71
shepherding and agriculture, that town life in general is
due.
Let us look at commerce first. No locality is likely
to furnish everything that its inhabitants want or can use.
Differences of soil, climate and mineral deposits result in
more products of a given kind in one region than
its people need. Another part of the country
shows a deficiency in respect of that particular
product, and an oversupply of something else. Dif-
ferences of this kind give rise to commerce, or
the exchange of labor products. Exchange arose at an
early period in the ancient east. A large trade grew up
between Egypt, Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Greece, and
outlying barbarian tribes (13). In connection with the
exchange of products it becomes convenient and even nec-
essary to establish definite centers where trade can be
regularly and peacefully carried on; and this is only an-
other way of saying that towns are involved in the growth
of commerce.
The other principal factor of which we have spoken
as contributory to town life is manufactures. It is evi-
dent that long before the rise of urban groups, manufac-
turing occupations are, in a small way, necessary on ag-
ricultural estates, in the production of tools, clothing,
houses, outbuildings, etc. In this fact w^e see the forces
which at length set aside the more clever workers as crafts-
men in contrast with the more primitive workers, whose
occupations remain those of tilling the soil and caring for
livestock. As population multiplies, and increases the
amount of manufacturing work to be done, it is more effi-
cient for artisans to be stationed at the points where raw
material exchanges. Hence the influence of this branch of
industry upon town life.
It is important to emphasize that both commerce and
manufacture are at first aristocratic in form, and largely
so in substance. Commerce is primarily the exchange
of their appropriations among the upper classes of differ-
ent localities (14). Its aristocratic form, however, is
72 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
misleading unless we look below the surface, for while it
secures the exchange of products intended for the use of
the upper class, it also provides that circulation of raw
materials and tools which promotes the subsistence and
steady employment of the lower class.
The oriental nobility usually retained personal
property rights over commerce, managing its operations
through a corps of slave-stewards. The steward was
placed in authority over his fellow slaves. The figures of
the oriental aristocrat and his steward are familiar in the
literature of the Old Testament. The steward of Abra-
ham's house was Eliezer of Damascus (Genesis 15:2. Of.
1 Ohronicles 2:34, 35); and the master and his steward
reappear in the New Testament in the parables of Jesus.
Being the most important slave in his owner's employ-
ment, the steward was favored in proportion. In order to
stimulate him to the most efficient service he was per-
mitted to retain a commission on the products whose
exchange he superintended. In this way he could ac-
cumulate considerable wealth of his own in the form
of goods, and of money, and sometimes of slaves. He
might even buy his freedom, and set up as an inde-
pendent manager of commerce. It was only from the
ranks of a servile merchant class that a free merch-
ant class could originate in early times. A servile
trading class necessarily preceded a free trading class.
In spite of the tendency toward the formation of a
mercantile body distinct from the ancient nobility, the cur-
rents of oriental trade were not great enough to produce a
"third estate" of sufficient strength to assert itself col-
lectively against the older nobility. In Greece and Kome,
as well as in modern civilization, economic development
produced a "third estate" of great extent and influence.
In these later historical cases, a powerful social class was
brought into existence outside the pale of government, —
since politics, as we have seen, is always originally in the
hands of the free families of descent. In the classic and
western civilizations this new section of the upper class
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION.
was discriminated against by the older section of the up-
per class through its control of the taxing power and the
courts. Great historic collisions resulted, whose out-
come, in both classic and western civilization, was the
admission of the newly rich to a voice in the government.
In ancient Greece and Rome, and in modern Europe and
America, the basis of the state was thus transferred from
that of family to that of property regardless of descent.
In the oriental civilization, however, nothing of the kind
seems to have occurred. Nobilities always possess a lim-
ited assimilative capacity. It is probable that the forma-
tion of the oriental third estate never greatly outstripped
the assimilative capacity of upper-class oriental families.
Free merchants who accumulated wealth from commis-
sions on the goods they handled, and who bought land
and slaves of their own therewith, were doubtless admitted
to the ancient families either by marriage or by the solemn
ceremony of adoption. So that mostly, as remarked a
moment ago, the clan aristocracy of the ancient East re-
tained the proprietorship of commerce in its own hands.
In Babylonia, for instance, the original nobility of birth,
based on landholding, was eventually transformed into a
class predominantly commercial in character (15).
The aristocratic nature of early manufacture, like
that of early commerce, becomes manifest when we re-
flect upon the outstanding facts of organized society.
Since the upper class everywhere appropriated the major
part of the labor products of the masses, it was necessarily
this class that patronized the artisans of ancient cities.
Pertinent suggestions are found in the following passage
from Rawlinson :
"Trade flourished under the Pharaohs, and was en-
couraged not only by the lavish expenditure of the Court,
of the great nobles, and of the high ecclesiastics, but also
by the vast demand which there was for Egyptian produc-
tions in foreign countries'' (16).
Each of the great administrative offices in Egypt
possessed its own craftsmen and workmen (17).
74 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
It is often said that when the lower classes are held
in chattel slavery, or bound as serfs to the estates of great
landowners, there can be no "mobility of labor" as there
is in modern times when the lower class enjoys personal
freedom, and can come and go in response to the demands
of the market. As a matter of fact, however, an active
trade in slaves located skilled and unskilled labor where
it was most wanted; and the mobility of labor was per-
haps as great, in proportion to the development of the
age, as it is today among the more advanced western peo-
ples. This is only another example of the erroneous ideas
that gain currency in modern times respecting the social
economy of the ancients. We are too often tempted to
think of the society of early times as immovably fixed,
when in reality it illustrates the law of development as
fully in its own way as does modern civilization.
§ 34. — The rise of commerce illustrates, by the way,
a fact of importance in connection with our thesis. There
is danger of acquiring too rigorous an idea of the principle
with which we are working. Social cleavage into upper
and lower strata is an institution within the bowels of
society, rather than the mark of two utterly contrasted
and mutually exclusive social orders. When the noble
class did not retain personal proprietorship of commerce,
and an independent merchant class arose, it is plain that
the latter was drawn from the lower people by a rigid
process of selection. Even when the slave-managers of
commerce did not succeed in reaching legal freedom, they
were favored in proportion to their importance, and were
living witnesses to a social mobility which, in fact if not in
law, recruited the upper, directive stratum from the best
elements of the lower.
But it was not commerce alone that illustrated this
important fact. Ewald observes, in reference to the
slave-stewards of noble houses, that "in order to prevent
dispersion of the family property in default of a male heir,
such a one was often adopted as a son, or married to his
master's daughter'' (18). In Genesis 15 we read that
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 75
Abraham recognizes his steward, Eliezer of Damascus, as
his heir in case no son is born to the family. In 1 Chron-
icles 2 :34 the same custom is illustrated in the following
words : "Now Sheshan had no sons, but daughters. And
Sheshan had a slave, an Egyptian, whose name was Jarha.
And Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha his slave to wife."
Other glimpses into class relations, with respect to
the passage from the inferior to the superior stratum, are
afforded by the following selections from the modern liter-
ature of Egyptian history.
"Many a monument consecrated to the memory of
some nobleman gone to his long home, who during life
had held high rank at the court of Pharaoh, is decorated
with the simple but laudatory inscription, ^his ancestors
were unknown people' '' (19)..
"In the schools where the poor scribe's child sat on
the same bench beside the offspring of the rich, to be
trained in discipline and wise learning, the masters knew
how by timely words to goad on the lagging diligence of
the ambitious scholars, holding out to them the future
reward which awaited youths skilled in knowledge and let-
ters. . . . Even the clever son of the poor man might
hope by his knowledge to climb the ladder of the higher
offices, for neither his birth nor his position in life raised
any barrier, if only the youth's mental power justified
fair hopes for the future. In this sense the restraints of
caste did not exist, and neither descent nor family ham-
pered the rising of the clever" (20).
"The scribe is simply a man who knows how to read
and write, to draw up administrative formulas, and to cal-
culate interest. The instruction which he has received is
a necessary complement of his position if he belong to a
good family, whilst if he be poor it enables him to obtain
a lucrative situation in the administration or at the house
of a wealthy personage" (21).
"Cases have been seen of the son of a peasant or of
a poor citizen commencing by booking the delivery of
bread or vegetables in some provincial office, and ending^
76 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
after a long and industrious career, by governing one-half
of Egypt'' (22).
"The number of persons of obscure origin, who in this
manner had risen in a few years to the highest honors, and
died governors of provinces or ministers of Pharaoh, must
have been considerable. Their descendants followed in
their father's footsteps, until the day came when royal
favor or an advantageous marriage secured them the
possession of an hereditary fief [landed estate], and trans-
formed the son or grandson of a prosperous scribe into a
feudal lord. It was from people of this class, and from the
children of Pharaoh, that the nobility was mostly re-
cruited" (23).
Likewise in Babylonia, the slave "could become a
free citizen and rise to the highest offices of state. Slav-
ery was no bar to his promotion, nor did it imprint any
•stigma upon him" (24).
§ 35. — Religion was an important factor in oriental
social economy, as it is everywhere after a certain stage
has been reached in the social process. Just here we need
not specially refer to its origin. It is a well known fact
that all primitive people are superstitious. At a very early
period, before the entrance upon settled life, all races of
men acquire ideas about a supersensuous world of spirits,
great and small. These personal agents, usually thought
to be invisible, are imagined as inhabiting all sorts of
queer, out-of-the-way places, like trees, graves, mountain
tops, the air, etc. They are thought to be greatly inter-
ested in, and affected by, the actions of men; and the
primitive mind invests them with more or less power over
nature and over human life. Their anger must be averted,
and their favor obtained, by means of offerings, petitions,
and appropriate courses of conduct.
The religious idea, like any other, might remain a
mere idea, to survive or perish on its merits, if it had no
potentiality of social service. But anthropology and his-
tory show that religion has a most decided influence over
social life. The primitive social group, after passing a cer-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 77'
tain stage in its history, always acquires ideas not only of
spirits in general, but of a spirit which pertains especially
to that group. This spirit becomes a god, or divinity, who
is thought to be interested in and affected by the affairs
of the group, and who has power to help or hinder ; whose
favor can be obtained, and whose anger can be averted,
by offerings, petitions, and appropriate conduct. We have
seen that it is necessary that social groups be as coherent
as possible in the struggle for life ; and it is plain that the
religious idea serves to cement the bonds that hold primi-
tive societies together. In the words of Professor W. R.
Smith, primitive religion "did not exist for the saving of
souls but for the preservation and welfare of society, and
in all that was necessary to this end every man had to
take his part or break with the domestic and political
community to which he belonged" (25). The common
worship of a common deity, who is thought to lead in bat-
tle and fight for his people, cannot but serve to strengthen
communal feelings. In Assyria, for instance, —
"Assur was supreme over all other gods, as his repre-
sentative, the Assyrian king, was supreme over the other
kings of the earth. . . It was through ^trust in As-
sur' that the Assyrian armies went forth to conquer, and
through his help that they gained their victories. The
enemies of Assyria were his enemies, and it was to combat
and overcome them that the Assyrian monarchs declare
that they marched to war'' (26).
§ 36. — Although a god was regarded as belonging in
a general sense to the entire group, he was held to be es-
pecially the god of the upper class. His priests were
naturally chosen from the nobility. Political and reli-
gious headship were often united in the same person ; and
even when the priestly and kingly offices were not identi-
fied, the governmental and religious classes were closely
connected. Religion and politics went hand in hand; or,
in modern phrase, church and state were united.
As tribes coalesced into national groups, and settled
permanently upon the soil, the upper classes caused the
78 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
erection of temples and the establishment of regular
priesthoods and rituals. Temples were endowed with
landed estates and slaves. In Egypt, according to Mas-
pero, the territory of the gods embraced at all periods
within historic times about one-third of the whole
country (27).
"Under the Middle and also under the Old [Egyptian]
Empire each province was the seat of an ancient noble
family, who for generations inherited the government and
the high-priesthood of its temple. It is true that these pro-
vincial princes could only actually bequeath to their child-
ren the family estate and the membership in the priestly
college of their native temple ; but if there were no special
circumstances against it, the Pharaoh would always be-
stow the government on the great landowner of the
province, and in choosing their high priest, the [lesser]
priests could scarcely pass over the richest and most im-
portant personage among them'' (28).
Thus it begins to be evident that early religion was
more than an idea and a cult, and that it was intimately
involved in the secular life of society. As we have pre-
viously observed, if the religious idea had not had poten-
tiality of practical influence on society, it must have re-
mained a mere idea without visible issue; but as it was,
the social forces drew it down from the cloudland of the
imagination into the center of the great human drama;
and if we do not look sharply into the facts, we shall miss
the connection of religion with real life.
Turning from Egypt to Chaldea, we find that —
"The priests made great profit out of corn and metals,
and the skill with which they conducted commercial oper-
ations in silver was so notorious that no private person
hesitated to entrust them with the management of his capi-
tal: they were the intermediaries between lenders and
borrowers, and the commissions which they obtained in
these transactions were not the smallest or the least cer-
tain of their profits. They maintained troops of slaves,
laborers, gardeners, workmen, ... all of whom either
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 79
worked directly for them in their several trades or were
let out to those who needed their services'' (29.)
"The worship of their deities by the Babylon-
ians .... formed one of the most important as-
pects of the national life, and, as their temples were the
largest of their buildings, so the priests were the most
powerful class in the community. In each city the largest
and most important temple was that devoted to the city-
god. . . . Situated on a lofty platform and rising
stage upon stage, these ziggurats or temple-towers domi-
nated the surrounding houses, and were more imposing
than the royal palaces themselves. At the summit of each
the image of the god reposed in his shrine, and around
its base clustered the temple offices and the dwellings of
the priests. . . . The temples were under the direct
patronage of the kings, who prided themselves on the re-
building and restoration of their fabrics as much as on the
successful issue of their campaigns, while the priesthood
were supported by regular and appointed offerings in ad-
dition to the revenues they drew from the lands and pro-
perty with which the temples were endowed. The influ-
ence of the priests upon the people was exerted from many
sides, for not only were they the god's representatives,
. . . but they also regulated and controlled all de-
partments of life. They represented the learned section of
the nation, and in all probability the scribes belonged en-
tirely to the priestly class. They composed and preserved
the national records, and although some of the later As-
syrian kings collected libraries in their palaces, this was
probably accomplished only with the cooperation of the
priesthood and by drawing on the collection of tablets pre-
served in the great temples throughout the country" (30).
The priesthood was, in fact, a part of the upper class ;
and the religious phase of social development must be
studied principally from the standpoint of the great, all-
pervading institution of cleavage.
Paradoxically speaking, the religious idea has been
valuable to society, not for its intrinsic worth as an idea,
80 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
but in the proportion that it has lent itself to the practical^
terrestrial needs of real life. And it has lent itself to
these needs by functioning as a concrete structural no-
tion upon which secular institutions can form themselves.
What is meant is, that in studying religious history we
are examining social, secular history under the special
guise of religious history. The sooner we assimilate this
paradoxical fact, the sooner we shall be prepared to begin
to understand the religious phase of social evolution. Re-
ligion has been a positive element in human history in
the proportion that it has been "materialistic." We say
this, and enclose the term in quotation points, in the con-
sciousness that we shall not improbably be misunderstood
and misrepresented in all good faith. So long as reli-
gion has been involved in the satisfaction of some tangible
social need, just so long has it been a dramatic element
in the evolution of society. But in the proportion that
these needs are satisfied, and religious institutions come
to represent merely the idea upon which they are nomin-
ally based, just in this degree does religion cease to be a
positive, dramatic factor in society, and revert to the
status of a simple idea, surviving, changing, or perishing
strictly on its absolute merits.
In the present connection we are concerned to empha-
size that, given the religious idea as a psychological fact,
religious history must be studied principally from the
standpoint of cleavage.
Perception of this truth helps us again to see that the
upper-class control of any given phase of society — in-
dustrial, political, religious, etc. — was more or less mixed
up with all kinds of social functions. Oriental civiliza-
tion, as previously pointed out, represents a primitive
stage of social evolution; and all primitive social life,
as contrasted with modern society, is relatively indefinite
and undifferentiated.
§ 37. — We have obtained passing glimpses of ori-
ental education in the course of our survey. This depart-
ment of life, too, was in the hands of the upper class.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 81
The schools were in charge, or under the direction, of the
priesthood. It was the schools that fostered and ex-
tended the beginnings of human learning — writing,
mathematics, astronomy, etc. It was the schools that
educated the aristocrac}^, and freely trained poor child-
ren of promising talents to become useful members of the
community.
In addition to the various glimpses of oriental in-
tellectual life thus far obtained, a passage from Profes-
sor Rogers' work on Babylonian and Assyrian history af-
fords an instructive insight :
^^The closing years of AsshurbanapaFs long and la-
borious reign were largely spent in works of peace. Even
during the stormy years he had had great interest in the
erection of buildings and the collection and copying of
books for his library. In such congenial tasks his latter
days were chiefly spent. . . . The two kingdoms were
ransacked for the clay books which had been written in
days gone by. Works of grammar, of lexicography, of
poetry, history, science, and religion w^ere brought from
ancient libraries in Babylonia. They were carefully
copied in the Assyrian style, with notes descriptive, chro-
nological, or explanatory, by the scholars of the court,
and the copies were preserved in the palace, while the
originals went back to the place whence they were bor-
rowed. The library thus formed numbered many thous-
ands of books. In it the scholars, whom Asshurbanapal
patronized so well, worked carefully on in the writing of
new books on all the range of learning of the day. Out
of an atmosphere like that came the records of Asshur-
banapaFs own reign. Small wonder it is that under such
conditions his historical inscriptions should be couched
in a style finished, elegant, and rhythmical, with which
the bare records of fact of previous reigns may not be com-
pared at air' (31).
Assyria was originally an off-shoot from Babylonia;
and it is to the mother country at a still earlier period that
we must look for more primitive stages of intellectual cul-
6
82 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ture. From the Persian Gulf in the east to Upper Egypt
in the west the Babylonian language was known and used,
at least fifteen hundred years before Christ, for purposes
of international communication. Babylonian culture was
carried westward to the Greeks, who, in turn, did a great
deal of the thinking upon which modern science and cul-
ture are based. Professor Sayce has given such a vivid
sketch of the oriental postal system, through which flowed
many of the currents of intellectual life, that his account
should be read in this connection.
^^There were excellent roads all over Western Asia,
with post-stations at intervals where relays of horses could
be procured. Along these all letters to or from the king
and the government were carried by royal messengers.
It is probable that the letters of private individuals were
also carried by the same hands. The letters of Tel-el- Am-
arna give us some idea of the wide extension of the postal
system and the ease with which letters were constantly
being conveyed from one part of the East to another.
The foreign correspondence of Pharaoh was carried on
with Babjdonia and Assyria in the east, Mesopotamia and
Cappadocia in the north, and Palestine and Syria in the
west. The civilized oriental world was thus bound to-
gether by a network of postal routes over which literary
intercourse was perpetually passing. . . . The Cana-
anite corresponded with his friends and neighbors quite as
much as the Babylonian, and his correspondence was con-
ducted in the same language and script. Hiram of Tyre,
in sending letters to Solomon, did but carry on the tra-
ditions of a distant past. Long before the Israelites en-
tered Palestine both a foreign and an inland postal ser-
vice had been established there while it was still under
Babylonian rule. The art of reading and writing must
have been widely spread, and when it is remembered that
for the larger number of the Tel-el- Amarna writers the lan-
guage and system of writing which they used were of for-
eign origin, it may be concluded that the education given
at the time was of no despicable character" (32).
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 83
§ 38. — Our inquiry thus far has shown us that ori-
ental society, in every phase of its life, was organized on
the lines of cleavage. This great institution seems to be
wholly unjust. It seems to be wrong for an upper class
to appropriate, consume, and control the labor products
of a lower class by means of property right of any kind.
But the beneficence of cleavage as a channel for the dis-
charge of evolutionary force resolves the ethical problem
into a question of relativity. A test of the question is to
be found in a comparison of human life in the stone age,
or among savages, and life in the more advanced societies.
Let us frankly admit that great evils are involved in civili-
zation as well as in the primitive struggle for existence.
We have to inquire, first, whether the greatest good of the
greatest number is better conserved, on the whole, by prim-
itive conditions or by historic conditions. Do primitive
conditions have a greater potency for human happiness
than historic conditions? Or do the latter involve more
actual and possible good than the former?
A careful study of the primitive struggle for exist-
ence, as contrasted with the conditions thus far brought
out in our scrutiny of ancient civilization, cannot fail, we
think, to show the superiority of the historic over the more
primitive stage of human evolution. The upper class prac-
tically owned the lower class, and appropriated its labor
without engaging to make repayment. There was no give
and take between equals. But the upper class did not
simply consume its appropriations in idle luxury. If
cleavage had merely provided for the parasitic exploita-
tion of the lower class, then the social groups wherein it
became a factor must apparently have been swept aside in
prehistoric times.* The societies that have emerged from
* Mr. Lester F. Ward, who has done so much good work in sociology,
seems to have gone astray on the subject of class relations. • In his
Dynamic Sociology he identifies the parasitic-leisure class with the
upper class of all history. As a matter of fact, parasitism is only an
involution of the upper-class control of society. When settled society
increases in population, the perfecting of land monopoly makes the subjec-
84 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the terrific struggles of the prehistoric age, and made
progress in civilization, have invariably exhibited the
phenomenon of cleavage. This book is not a blind apology
for cleavage, but a protest against blind attacks on a great
historic institution, and a plea for middle ground. The
universe, as a whole and in all its details, so far as we
know it, is a manifestation of opposed "forces," or "ten-
dencies." Human society, as a cosmic fact, falls under
the reign of this law; and it must be approached with
this truth in view if we are to begin to comprehend the
social problem. Although the lower class received no di-
rect, immediately apparent, economic return for its labor,
it received a large return indirectly. In the more primi-
tive, animal period, life was precarious, food uncertain,
clothing and shelter insufficient, ignorance universal.
But the advance of the evolutionary process into settled
life included all concerned in a growing social system
which at first, on the whole, brought more good than evil
— more actual good, and more possibilities of good, than
men had known before. The upper class controlled the
labor of the lower class under unequal terms. But cleav-
age actively enlisted the egoism of the upper class in the
tremendous work of social development. A large part of
the appropriated labor of the masses was converted into
the material and spiritual tools whereby humanity con-
quers its environment and struggles upward along the
path of progress. It was material tools, knowledge, men-
tal training, organization — in other words, capital in the
largest sense — that early prehistoric man lacked and
needed. It is material and spiritual capital with which to
develop nature's resources that man must have if he is to
tion of the lower class more complete, and throws the incidental parasitism
of the upper class out into ever bolder relief. This, however, is a prob-
lem by itself. It is illustrated eventually in the life of all settled society.
But the total significance of cleavage should not be tested from the
standpoint of the evils developed in connection with it. These do not
control the entire perspective by any means.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 85
rise above primitive levels. Development is the outcome
of reactions between organism and environment. The
higher evolution of mankind has come with the physical
and intellectual appropriation of their environment. The
degree in which we appropriate our environment, phys-
ically and intellectually, is the measure of our civilization.
It is impossible for large numbers of men to affiliate in
society without vast and various capital. The beginnings
of material progress began to supply a small amount of
capital, probably on the individualistic basis. But mater-
ial progress, by producing a surplus in the midst of the
primitive struggle for existence, issued in social cleavage ;
and this institution had the effect of a forced draught on
a smoldering fire. In the resulting civilization, life be-
came surer, the production of food steadier and more ex-
tensive, and the preparation of clothing and shelter more
satisfactory, than in the earlier period. By promoting the
growth of capital, the upper class unconsciously served
the lower class, and forced the different sections of the
humble folk to serve each other. Civilization, to all out-
ward appearance, is based on exploitation; but in its
deepest essence, it is founded on the law of service. Cleav-
age is a paradoxical involution of the law of service.
§ 39. — But, having studied cleavage in the oriental
world thus far with reference to its beneficent aspects, it
is necessary at this point for us to emphasize the opposite
side of the paradox. At length its abuses, never absent,
began palpably to outweigh its benefits. As tribes took up
definite homes, and formed settled nations and empires,
the upper classes reached out and slowly absorbed the
soil. Population steadily multiplied, and thus increased
the demand for, and the value of, land. The growing
monopoly of the soil gave the superior class a not less
powerful, but far more subtle, hold upon the masses than
did slavery. The masses, being in complete economic
dependence, and without popular political institutions
through which to express their wants, lost interest and
vigor. The upper class, with its increasing wealth and
86 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
luxury, became effeminate and morally corrupt, having
never had an intelligent understanding of its public, or
social, function, and being wholly incapable of solving the
problem which brought advancing civilization to a stand.
Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Phoenicia, and Israel sank into
mysterious decline in their ancient seats; and the proud
oriental civilization began more and more to succumb to
the shock of assault from without. New races came crowd-
ing upon the scene — Elamites, Kasshites, Ethiopians,
Scythians, Medes, Persians, Greeks, and Komans. It
would seem that oriental society, having waxed powerful
up to a certain stage, ought to have repelled these enemies
instead of offering a weaker and weaker front to their
assaults. But the contrary was the case; and the genius
of progress at length departed from the eastern world.
§ 40. — Before carrying the development of our main
thesis further it is necessary to look more closely into the
great problem which oriental civilization failed to solve.
This can be attempted to best effect in connection with a
somewhat detailed study of that interesting oriental peo-
ple known generally as "Israel." The Israelites bred a
line of preachers, or "prophets,'' who made the first dra-
matic attempt in human history to cope with the social
problem, and who have profoundly influenced later
thought.* As Kenan justly says, it is through prophecy
that Israel occupies a place in the history of the
world (33). In order to study Israel and the prophets
it is necessary to make what will here seem, at first, like
an unwarranted digression. This turning aside, however,
will serve not only to illustrate the nature of the problem
which oriental society encountered, and which every civi-
lization is compelled sooner or later to face; but it will
bring out with even greater emphasis the relation of cleav-
age to history, as well as make intelligible some of the
* The English word "prophet" meant primarily a preacher, not simply
a predictor; although a predictive element might enter the preaching of
the prophet; and the Hebrew term which it represents is to be taken in
this general sense. Of this, however, more later.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 87
later developments of our subject. Our general thesis
forces us to examine the nature of this problem, since it
is out of attempts to solve it that some of the later insti-
tutions of the oriental, classic, and western societies take
their origin. Our thesis opens up one side of a paradox
which must be treated from both sides if our examination
of society is to reach the most intelligible results. How-
ever, since this proposition is anticipative its force does
not become fully evident at this early stage of the inquiry.
§ 41. — It should be observed at the outset that Israel
was a late comer among the ancient nations. The great
peoples of oriental civilization had reached perhaps the
height of their culture while yet the ancestors of the Is-
raelites were wandering barbarians in the desert. The
"children of Israel" came forward into the light of history
during their conquest and settlement of a strip of terri-
tory on the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean. We
have learned that the passage from barbarism to civiliza-
tion is always attended by the permanent occupation of
some definite territory; and we are thus prepared to see
that the Israelite conquest of Canaan was a normal, not
an extraordinary, event in history.
§ 42. — We have but little trustworthy information
touching the details of Israelitish history before the time
of the Conquest. Like other ancient peoples, they de-
veloped a mass of myth and legend in the effort to account
for their origin. Modern research, however, leaves no
doubt as to their proximate origin, at least. They were
simply one of the families of the great Semitic race ; and,
like other nations, they came forward into the light of
history out of prehistoric barbarism. Just as the Anglo-
Saxon people of the United States, Canada, Australia, and
New Zealand are descended principally from English fore-
fathers, so the Israelites, in common with the Moabites,
Edomites, Ammonites, Phoenicians, Arameans, Arabs,
Babylonians, Assyrians, and other oriental peoples, were
derived partly or wholly from prehistoric barbarian Sem-
ites, who had swarmed out in successive waves from their
88 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
earlier homeland (probably Arabia), and overspread the
ancient eastern world. According to Genesis 19 and 30,
even the legends of Israel recognize the kinship of the Is-
raelites with the Moabites, Edomites, and Ammonites ; and
chapters 11 and 15 of the same book speak of the ancestors
of this people as immigrants from the country of Chaldea.
The Israelites used practically the same language and sys-
tem of writing as their neighbors, and had no difficulty in
coming verbally to terms with them.
This people, then, was not a nation apart. The Is-
raelites belonged to one of the great races of mankind;
and came forward on the stage of history, like all historic
nations, through the tumult of war and conquest (34).
§ 43. — Critical study of the canonic literature of Is-
rael (the Old Testament) shows that its beginnings were
made in Semitic heathenism; and that after the Israel-
ites had developed a purer form of religion, a higher
stratum of writings was laid over the earlier; while the
foundation literature itself was, to some extent, edited in a
sincere effort to harmonize it with the later developments.
The adjustment of the heathen writings to the newer faith,
hovv^ever, was not the outcome of a perfectly coordinated
effort or series of efforts. There was no absolute unity
of plan in the production and the arrangement of the
literature; and the Old Testament is, in fact, a loose col-
lection of books by many authors and editors. The books
themselves are, in many instances, logically and chrono-
logically out of place; and scholarship encounters little
difficulty in restoring at least the essential outlines of the
history and religious development of this interesting ori-
ental people.
The general position of modern Biblical scholarship
is well described in the following words of Professor 0.
H. Cornill of Konigsberg, an expert of the first rank :
"At the time when the historical books of the Old
Testament were put into the final form in which they now
lie before us, during and after the Babylonish exile, the
past was no longer understood. Men were ashamed of it.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 89
They could not understand that in the days of old all had
been so completely different, and therefore did all in their
power to erase and blot out of their accounts of the past
whatever at this later date might be a cause of offence.
In the same manner the Arabs, after their conversion to
Islam, purposely obliterated all traces of the era of "folly,"
as they termed the pre-Islamitic period of their existence,
so that it gives one the greatest difficulty to get in any
wise a clear picture of the early Arabic paganism. The
history of the German nation has also an analogous spec-
tacle to show in the blind and ill-advised zeal of the Chris-
tian converts who systematically destroyed the old pagan
literature, which a man like Charles the Great had gath-
ered together with such love and appreciation. This,
luckily, the men to whom we owe the compilation and final
redaction of the ancient Israelitish literature did not do;
they were satisfied with emendations and corrections, and
left enough standing to afford, at least to the trained eye
of the modern critic, a sufficient groundwork for unravel-
ing tHe truth. The newest phase of Old Testament in-
vestigation has succeeded in raising this veil, now more
than two thousand years old, and through an act similar
to that of Copernicus, by w^hich, so to speak, the narrative
was turned upside down, has brought out the real his-
torical truth" (35).
It is almost unnecessary to add that the life of Israel,
in every phase and throughout its whole extent, must be
studied not only by the help of the canonical and uncanoni-
cal books of that people, but in the light of evidence de-
rived from the nations with which Israel came into con-
tact, as well as in view of truths derived from the study of
mankind in general.
§ 44. — By w ay of preliminary to a survey of the so-
cial history of the Israelites we must obtain a view of
their early religion; and before this, in turn, must come
notice of the origin and nature of primitive religion in
general.
90 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
It has been well said that while there are some savage
tribes which apparently have no religion, there are no
savages without ghosts or superstitions of some kind. We
have already observed that practically the entire human
race has some idea, more or less definite, of a mysterious,
unseen personal world, which in some way influences hu-
man life. This persuasion may exist unformulated
among the most backward, or it may be developed into
definite doctrines and practices among the more progres-
sive races; but in its essentials it is everywhere based on
the same foundations; and it everywhere constitutes the
backbone of religious development. The general question
here is. How did religion start? This has been fully and
conclusively answered by modern investigators; and we
do not need to go into the subject at any length in this
connection. It will be sufficient to give a sketch of the re-
sults attained by expert students of the problem.
§ 45. — It is well known that children believe dreams
to be actual events. They are unable to distinguish be-
tween the subjective dream world and the objective world
of reality. A little boy of the writer's acquaintance once
persisted in declaring that he had killed a cow. Older
people thought he was telling an untruth. The probability
is, that he had dreamed of killing a cow. Doubtless many
of the falsehoods of little people are equally innocent. We
know, in the same w^ay, from the independent testimony
of responsible travelers in all parts of the world, that sav-
ages mistake dreams for actual happenings. Mr. Im
Thurn, a traveler in British Guiana, relates a case in
point, which gives an interesting glimpse into primitive
psychology.
"One morning when it was important to get away
from a camp on the Essequibo River, at which I had been
detained for some days by the illness of some of my In-
dian companions, I found that one of the invalids, a young
Macusi Indian, though better in health was so enraged
against me that he refused to stir; for he declared that,
with great want of consideration for his weak health, I
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 91
had taken him out during the night, and had made him
drag the canoe up a series of difficult cataracts. Nothing
could persuade him of the fact that this was but a dream.
At that time we were all suffering from a great
scarcity of food. . . . Morning after morning the In-
dians declared that some absent man, whom they named,
had visited their hammocks during the night, and had
beaten or otherwise maltreated them; and they always
insisted upon much rubbing of the supposed bruised parts
of their bodies" (36).
In accordance with these facts, then, dreams are not
dreams to the primitive mind, but real, objective events.
The inconsistencies between dream life and real life
are reconciled by a rude and easy philosophy. In the
visions of the night the primitive man goes far afield,
hunts, feasts, and fights. But at length he learns that
these events take place while his body is lying quietly
in the hut or cave where he sleeps. His wife has been
awake, perhaps, for some time, stirring the fire, watching
and listening, when he suddenly comes to consciousness
and tells her that he has just been away on a long jour-
ney. But she replies that she has been awake, and that
he has been sleeping by the fire, and has not been away at
all. Then, still more bewildering, the primitive man seqs,
among the companions of his dreams, not only the faces
of the living, but the moving forms of old friends that he
knows to be long dead and buried in the earth. What
more natural than that there should at length arise among
prehistoric men the idea that the body possesses a ghostly
or air-like double, an independent duplicate, free to roam
about while the body itself sleeps or crumbles into dust?
To the primitive mind, this rude philosophy explains the
facts. We find it everywhere among mankind. The primi-
tive man, after acquiring the ghost philosophy, would re-
late in all seriousness how, when lying down to sleep, he
"went away from himself,'' and then after a while "came
back to himself.'' And thus we, his descendants, using the
same phrases, speak of "losing ourselves" when going to
92 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
sleep, and of "coming to ourselves'^ when awakening. The
primitive form of words remains, but emptied of its long
forgotten meaning.
§ 46. — An unimportant person would be forgotten in
later generations of prehistoric men, just as the mass of
men perish out of human memory now. But the decease
of a clan father, or of a tribal chief, was an important
event. The worship of the dead is widespread among
primitive races. Offerings of food are made at the grave
or tomb, or before the prepared corpse. The philosophy
of these offerings is a part of the primitive ghost philos-
ophy. Not only men, but things, are seen in dreams.
Therefore, not only do men have ghostly doubles, but in-
animate things also have ghostly replicas. Upon the death
of an important personage, the living made haste, then, to
offer him nourishment in order that his spirit might enjoy
the ghostly part of the food.
§ 47. — Since all the important persons in society
are never of equal influence or importance, it follows that
the ghosts which the primitive man worshipped were not
all on the same level. First, there would naturally be the
worship of the ancestors of the smaller family circles.
This is well represented today by the Chinese, for instance,
with their "ancestral tablets." In ancient history the
Komans, with their "Lares and Penates,'' or little family
gods, are a good illustration. Concerning these, Mommsen
writes :
"Of all the worships of Rome that which perhaps had
the deepest hold was the worship of the tutelary spirits
that presided in and over the household and the store-
chamber: these were in public worship Vesta and the
Penates, in family worship the gods of forest and field,
the Silvani, and above all the gods of the household in
the strict sense, the Lases or Lares, to whom their share of
the famil}^ meal was regularly assigned, and before whom
it was, even in the time of Cato the Elder, the first duty
of the father of the household on returning home to per-
form his devotions. In the ranking of the gods, however,
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 93:
these spirits of the house and of the field occupied the
lowest rather than the highest place'' (37).
§ 48. — Above the little family gods came the larger
gods of the clan, or group of families; and of the tribe,
or association of clans; and of the nation, or union of
tribes. These more important deities were derived from
chiefs and kings — prehistoric Napoleons, and Julius.
Caesars, and Alexanders.
Attention to the worship and food of a dead chief or
king, who had led his people successfully in war, guaran-
teed the post-mortem continuance of the help and leader-
ship which he had given during his lifetime. In conflicts
with their foes, his people would call upon his name, and
encourage each other in the thought that he was still pres-
ent, helping them and hindering their enemies. This would
naturally stimulate them to do their best. If success came,
or if any unusual natural phenomenon helped them and
hindered their enemies, it would confirm their devotion
to the spirit of the dead chief. If they failed in battle
and were permanently conquered, this proved, not that
the worship of dead chiefs in general was wrong, but that
the worship of that particular dead chief was not a pay-
ing institution.
Thus the primitive mind evolved a belief which, in
the case of a conquering tribe or nation, was always held
to prove itself. The belief was a mental factor in mater-
ial success ; while material success, in turn, strengthened
belief in the power of the dead leader's ghost and extended
his worship. The primitive mind was never skeptical
about religion as a general proposition. It was only
particular, concrete religions that excited skepticism.
The question was "Does it pay?" And the answer to this,^
in turn, depended upon circumstances which the primi-
tive mind interpreted after a fashion of its own.
§ 49. — The gods were not at first thought of as crea-
tors. They were merely translated men, very powerful
and somewhat capricious beings, reflecting the passions
of belligerent humanity, and, like men, largely concerned
^4 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
with war. There was not at first any idea of one supreme
and only God, for conditions during the earlier stages
of social development were unfavorable to such a magni-
ficent conception.
§ 50. — Primitive religion, then, is intensely social
and practical. Its nature has been so well set forth by
Professor W. R. Smith that we reproduce the following
passages from his work on the early religion of the Sem-
ites :
"The circle into which a man was born was not
simply a group of kinsfolk and fellow-citizens, but em-
braced also certaiti divine beings, the gods of the family
and of the state, which to the ancient mind were as much
a part of the particular community with which they stood
connected as the human members of the social circle.
The relation between the gods of antiquity and their wor-
shippers was expressed in the language of human rela-
tionship, and this language was not taken in a figura-
tive sense but with strict literality. If a god was spoken
of as father and his worshippers as his offspring, the
meaning was that the worshippers were literally of his
stock, that he and they made up one natural family with
reciprocal family duties to one another. . . . The
social body was not made up of men only, but of gods
and men. . . . Religion [existed] for the preservation
and welfare of society, and in all that was necessary to
this end every man had to take his part, or break with the
domestic and political community to which he be-
longed" (38).
§ 51. — The use of idols, or images, in religion grows
out of customs connected with the corpses of great men.
On this point we reproduce a passage from Mr. Grant
Allen :
"The earliest Idols . . . are not idols at all —
not images or representations of the dead person, but
actual bodies, preserved and mummified. These pass
readily, however, into various types of representative
figures. For in the first place the mummy itself is usu-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 95
ally wrapped round in swathing-clothes which obscure its
features ; and in the second place it is frequently enclosed
in a wooden mummy-case, which is itself most often
rudely human in form, and which has undoubtedly given
rise to certain forms of idols. Thus the images of Amun,
Khem, Osiris and Ptah among Egyptian gods are fre-
quently or habitually those of a mummy in a mummy-case.
But furthermore, the mummy itself is seldom or never the
entire man; the intestines at least have been removed,
or even, as in New Guinea, the entire mass of flesh, leav-
ing only the skin and skeleton. The eyes, again, are
often replaced, as in Peru, by some other imitative ob-
ject, so as to keep up the lifelike appearance. Cases like
these lead on to others, where the image or idol gradually
supersedes altogether the corpse or mummy. . . .
Landa says of the Yucatanese that they cut off the heads
of the ancient lords of Cocom when they died, and
cleared them from flesh by cooking them; then they
sawed off the top of the skull, filled in the rest of the head
with cement, and making the face as like as possible
to the original possessor, kept these images along with the
statues and the ashes. Note here the preservation of the
head as ' exceptionally sacred. In other cases they made
for their fathers wooden statues, put in the ashes of the
burnt body, and attached the skin of the occiput taken
off the corpse. These images, half mummy, half idol,
were kept in the oratories of their houses, and were
greatly reverenced and assiduously cared for. On all the
festivals, food and drink were offered to them. . . .
At a further stage ... we come upon the image pure
and simple" (39).
Thus we see that idols, in their origin, are not re-
garded as having power in and of themselves. They are
simply representative.
§ 52. — Among primitive peoples life after death is
not regarded with satisfaction. It is thought to be a
negative existence, dragged out in dark and gloomy
regions below ground — the chill underworld of the
96 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
shades. It is here that most people are thought to go after
death; and here they exist in the twilight gloom. Only
the gods and special sijirits live above ground; although
even they are supposed occasionally to visit the abodes of
the dead. Witches, wizards, and necromancers are per-
sons who are thought to be able to converse with the
spirits, to bring them up temporarily, and hence to act as
mediums between the living and the dead.
§ 53. — Strange as it still seems to many people, the
religion of Israel at the outset, as w^ell as for several cen-
turies after the conquest of Canaan, is not to be regarded as
essentially unlike the religions of other primitive peoples.
This is now, indeed, a commonplace of historical science.
Continuing our apparent digression, let us glance at the
early religion of Israel.
§ 54. — At the time of their entrance into Canaan,
the associated tribes of Israel, in their character as a na-
tion, acknowledged the over-lordship of only one deity.
In the fourth verse of the sixty-eighth Psalm, we find the
first syllable of his name, given as accurately as it can
be rendered in a modern Aryan tongue, thus : "jah." The
syllable is pronounced as in the word "hallelujah," which
means, "Give praise to Yah,'' or "Praise Yah." We fre-
quently find this name-syllable as an element in the names
of Israelitish characters. 'For instance: Elijah, or Eli-
yah; Isaiah, or Isayah; Hezekiah, or Hezekyah. The
more familiar "Jehovah," or "Jahovah," was introduced
in the sixteenth century by a monk named Galatinus, who
got this incorrect form by combining the consonants of
the full name of Israel's national god with the vowels of
the Hebrew common noun "adoni," or "edonai," which
means "lord." The more correct form is partially as given
in Psalm 68 ; that is "Yah," or, in full, "Yahweh."
§ 55. — This notice of the verbal symbol for the Is-
raelite national god is preliminary to a view of Yahweh
himself in his original character. Just as Israel was only
one people among the other peoples of the earth, so Yah-
weh was at first regarded as a god among other gods. He
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 97
was thought to be, not the only God in the universe, but
simply the national god of Israel. His original character
in this respect comes out with startling distinctness in sev-
eral passages belonging to what we have called the "foun-
dation literature'- of the Old Testament. Thus, in Judges
11 : 23, 24, certain words are put in the mouth of Jeptha,
one of the so called "judges" of Israel, in which he ad-
dresses the king of the Ammonites as follows: "So now
Yahweh, the god of Israel, hath dispossessed the Amorites
from before his people Israel, and shouldst thou possess
them? Wilt thou not possess that which Chemosh thy
god giveth thee to possess? So whomsoever Yahweh, our
god, hath dispossessed from before us, them will we
possess." Here, a foreign god is clearly recognized as con-
quering territory for his people, just as Yahweh conquers
territory for the Israelites. The passage seems to make
a mistake in associating the god Chemosh with the Ammon-
ites, for the god of Ammon was Milcom (1 Kings 11:5,
33 ; 2 Kings 23 : 13). Chemosh was the god of the neigh-
boring Moabites, as in Numbers 21 : 29 : "Woe unto thee,
Moab! Thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: He
[Chemosh] hath given his sons as fugitives, and his daugh-
ters into captivity, unto Sihon, King of the Amorites."
This passage, like the other, admits the reality and power
of a foreign god.
A more familiar illustration of the same idea is found
in the first chapter of the book of Ruth. An Israelite,
named Elimelech, had gone over into the country of Moab
with his wife Naomi and his two sons. The sons took wives
of the women of Moab. After a time the father and sons
died, leaving Naomi with her two daughters-in-law. Na-
omi now decided to leave Moab and return to her old
home in Israel. When she set out, her daughters-in-law
started to go with her. But Naomi expostulated with
them, advising them to remain in their old home. One of
the daughters, Orpah by name, accordingly went back.
But the other, whose name was Ruth, would not do so.
7
98 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Upon this, Naomi turned to Euth and said: "Behold,
thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto
her god: return thou after thy sister-in-law." To this,
Ruth replied, "Intreat me not to leave thee, and to return
from following after thee ; for wherever thou goest, I will
go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people
shall be my people, and thy god my god.'' In this ease,
the Israelite woman urges the Moabite woman to return
to Moab and to Chemosh, the god of Moab. But with
the Moabite woman, personal ties overbalance national
ties. If she may accompany her beloved mother-in-law,
she is willing to leave Moab and the god of Moab, and
go to any people and any god that Naomi chooses. Any of
the gods will do for Ruth. In her own country she has
been worshipping Chemosh. Her sister has gone back to
Chemosh; and Naomi advises Ruth to do the same. But
if her mother-in-law is going to return to Israel and Yah-
weh, then Ruth also will go to Israel and Yahweh.
The successful struggle of the Israelites to obtain
possession of the land of Canaan implied, of course, not
only that Israel acquired the land, but also that Yahweh
had acquired it. Canaan became not only the land of Is-
rael, but also the land of Yahweh. He became the "god
of the land," as the ancient saying goes. In those times,
removal from a country, as in the case of Ruth and Na-
omi, was usually the same as leaving the Avorship of that
country's god. Ruth and Orpah and Naomi thought it
natural and right to serve the deity of any people among
whom they lived. Words illustrating this idea are put
in the mouth of the famous David in 1 Samuel 26 :19, 20 :
"They have driven me out this day that I should not
cleave unto the inheritance of Yahweh, saying, Go serve
other gods. Now, therefore, let not my blood fall to the
earth away from the presence of Yahweh." But if certain
formalities were observed, it was thought possible to wor-
ship the god of a land outside of his own "inheritance."
Naaman, captain of the army of the king of Syria, is rep-
resented as asking that some of the soil of the land of
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 99
Israel be given him, so that he could carry it away into
Syria, and worship Yahweh upon it (2 Kings 5:17). "I
pray thee," he says, "let there be given to thy servant two
mules' burden of earth; for thy servant will henceforth
offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto other gods,
but unto Yahweh.'' The same primitive ideas are illus-
trated by a passage in 2 Kings 17, which is partly repro-
duced here, and which needs no further comment.
"And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon,
and from Cuthah, and from Avva, and from Sepharvaim
instead of the children of Israel; and they possessed
Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof. And so it was
at the beginning of their dwelling there, that they feared
not Yahweh. . . . Then the king of Assyria com-
manded, saying. Carry thither one of the priests whom
ye brought from thence ; and let them go and dwell there,
and let him teach them the manner of the god of the land.
So one of the priests whom they had carried away from
Samaria came and dwelt in Bethel, and taught them how
they should fear Y^ahweh. Howbeit every nation made
gods of their own, and put them in the houses of the high
places which the Samaritans had made, every nation in
their cities wherein they dwelt. ... So they feared
Yahweh and made unto them from among themselves
priests of the high places, which sacrificed for them in the
houses of the high places. They feared Yahweh, and served
their own gods, after the manner of the nations from
among whom they had been carried away."
Another instructive example of ancient ideas about
national gods is afforded by the inscription on the famous
Moabite Stone. The stone was discovered in 1868, in what
was once the land of Moab, by the Keverend Klein, an
agent of the Church Missionary Society. This ancient
writing is inscribed in a language almost identical with
that of the early Israelites. The Moabite and Hebrew
letters are the same. The style of the inscription re-
sembles that of the earlier parts of the Old Testament.
And last but not least, the Moabite theology corresponds
100 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
with the primitive theology of Israel. The translation of
a part of the inscription is as follows :
"I am Mesha, King of Moab. . . . And I made
this high place for Chemosh. . . . Omri, King of Is-
rael, afflicted Moab for many days, because Chemosh was
angry with his land. And his son succeeded him ; and he
also said, I will afflict Moab. . . . But ... Is-
rael perished with an everlasting destruction. . . .
And Chemosh said unto me. Go, take Nebo against Is-
rael. And I went by night, and fought against it from the
break of dawn until noon. And I took it, and slew the
whole of it, 7,000 men and male strangers. . . . And
the king of Israel had built Yahas, and abode in it, whiJe
he fought against me. But Chemosh drave him out from
before me. . . . And Chemosh said unto me, Go
down, fight against Horonen. . . . And I went
down'' (40).
The god Yahweh of the Old Testament, then, was not
at first regarded as the supreme God of the universe.
Originally he was, at most, the national god of Israel,
just as Chemosh was the national god of Moab, or as
Dagon Avas a local god of the Philistines, or as Kimmon was
the god of the Syrians. In the words of Professor Well-
hausen, "Moab, Ammon, and Edom, Israel's nearest kins-
folk and neighbors, were monotheists in precisely the
same sense in which Israel itself was" (41).
§ 56. — We are careful to say that Yahweh was ori-
ginally at most the god of Israel, because there is a large
probability that Israel acquired him from a smaller peo-
ple shortly before the conquest of Canaan. Most ancient
gods grow up with the people that serve them; but the
Israelites cherished a tradition that Yahweh had "chosen,"
or "elected," them, and made a covenant with them, before
the conquest of Canaan; and this tradition, moreover,
seems to have a solid historical basis.
Prior to the settlement in Canaan, the Israelites, as
we have seen, were wandering shepherd tribes, living the
life of the desert. According to tradition, a number of
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 101
Israelitish tribes, while searching for subsistence in a
time of famine, were attracted by the pastures of Goshen,
on the northeastern frontier of Egypt. "The land of
Goshen," says Professor W.K. Smith, "did not belong to
the [Egyptian] Delta proper, which can never have been
given up to a shepherd tribe, and would not have suited
their way of life. In all ages nomadic or half nomadic
tribes, quite distinct from the Egyptians proper, have pas-
tured their flocks on the verge of the rich lands of the
Delta. . . . That the Israelites at this time came un-
der any considerable influence of Egyptian civilization
must appear highly improbable to any one who knows the
life of the nomads of Egypt even in the present day, when
there is a large Arab element in the settled population"
(42). Here, then, according to tradition, the original Is-
raelite tribes pitched their tents for a season. At first
they seem to have been tolerated by the Egyptian govern-
ment. Later, however, entanglements of Egypt with for-
eign powers may have moved the Pharaoh to place a guard
over these free sons of the desert, by way of precaution,
and to exact forced labor from them.
The real historical details of the situation are hid-
den in a haze of myth ; and in view of the positions pres-
ently to be worked out in connection with a study of Is-
raelite sociology in Canaan, these details, even if we could
recover them, are of little or no importance. At most,
they could only serve to satisfy a reasonable scientific
curiosity. The outstanding facts, however, appear to
be plain and simple: Temporary settlement on the bor-
ders of Egypt; trouble with the Egyptian government;
escape under the leadership of a man named Moses.
In greater detail the situation presents itself to the
writer as follows:
Moses was an Israelite who had perhaps made him-
self obnoxious to the Egyptian government by actively
espousing the cause of his brethren. He had been forced
out of the country; and had then attached himself to
a Midianitish tribe known as the "Kenites," and married
102 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
one of the daughters of Jethro, the priest and chief of
the Kenites.
The wandering ground of this tribe was in the
Mount Sinai region, adjacent to the land of Goshen
where the Israelites were temporarily located. But in
Judges 1: 16 we find that, in company with the Israel-
ites, these Kenites took part in the attack upon the land
of Canaan. "And the children of the Kenite, Moses'
father-in-law," so runs the record, "went up with the
children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah." In
Judges 4 and 5 we learn how Jael, the wife of Heber
the Kenite, helped on the cause of Israel and Yahweh
by killing Sisera, one of the enemies of Israel. There
were Kenites in the south of Judah in the time of king
Saul ( 1 Samuel 15 : 6) ; and David appears in connection
with a reference to the cities of these Kenites (1 Samuel
30 : 30). In the time of the two Israelite kingdoms, we
read in 2 Kings 10 of the "zeal" of Jonadab, or Jehona-
dab, the Kenite Rechabite (Cf. 1 Chronicles 2:55).
And later still, in the time of Jeremiah, we see the Ken-
ite descendants of this man Jehonadab pouring into Je-
rusalem from the country for fear of the army of the Chal-
deans ( Jeremiah 35). Thus it is plain that the Kenites of
Sinai joined forces with the Israelites when the latter
attacked the land of Canaan; and that they were at
length partially absorbed into Israel.
No desert tribe undertakes a migration of this kind
for trivial reasons. Probably the food supply of the Ken-
ites was falling short. Like many other tribes at this
time, they were evidently disturbed, and on the watch
for a new location.
We have, therefore, two important circumstances to
take into account: The Israelites in trouble in Goshen
on the northeast border of Egypt; and the Kenites in
trouble not far away in the Sinai region.
Now, the position toAvard which modern criticism
strongly gravitates is, that Yahweh was the god of the
Kenites before he became the god of Israel; and that
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 103
Moses was the medium whereby Israel became identified
with the name of this god. It is around these critical
propositions that we are here attempting a version of some
of the details of Israelite religion and history prior to the
conquest of Canaan.
Going back, then, to Moses, w^e find that after leav-
ing Egypt he married into the tribe of the Kenites. This
tribe, we may suppose, was outgrowing its old home in
the Sinai region; and the problem of subsistence was
becoming more pressing. But the Kenites alone were not
able to conquer the territories they needed. At the same
time, the Israelites, across the way on the borders of
Egypt, were being ill-treated by the government. Their
old gods had evidently forsaken or failed them; and
they had lost heart. But Moses now conceives a plan
whose execution makes him famous in history. Taking
advantage of the needs of both Israelites and Kenites,
he will combine the two peoples in an attack on the land
of Canaan. He communicates with his brethren in
Goshen, and tells them that Yahweh, the thundering god
of hosts, mighty in battle, together with his people the
Kenites, will help them to escape their troubles, and find
a more pleasant home in a land flowing with milk and
honey. This encourages the children of Israel; and
awaiting a favorable opportunity, they escape in the night.
Conditions in Egypt at this time were favorable to
such a move. Egyptian military strength was not what
it had been formerly. There were hostile pressure upon
the country from Avithout, and grievous pestilence within,
such as not infrequently sweeps over unsanitary and ig-
norant populations. At the time of the escape of the Is-
raelites there may have been a fight with, or a pursuit by,
an Egyptian guard; but, although the general situation is
plain, it is impossible to say what were the exact histori-
cal details, for the narratives upon which we mainly rely
are heavily incrusted with miraculous accounts. At any
rate, the exodus from Egyptian territory was regarded as
104 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
a deliverance; and it made a great impression that was
never forgotten.*
The alliance, or covenant, between Yahweh, the Is-
raelites, and the Kenites was formally celebrated at
Sinai, or Horeb, "the mountain of Yahweh," in a typi-
cally primitive manner. The record of this event is found
in the document whereof Exodus 18 : 12 is a part. Notice
the wording closely. "And Jethro, Moses' father in law,
brought a burnt offering and sacrifices for God. And
Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to eat bread with
Moses' father in law before God." (It may be explained
incidentally that the Hebrew word "elohim," plural in
form, but singular in ordinary Biblical usage, and here
translated "God," is an alternative term for "Yahweh,"
as in verse 1 of the same chapter). Notice that the burnt
offering and sacrifices were brought, not by Moses, nor
Aaron, nor by any of the Israelites, but by Jethro, the
leader and priest of the Kenites. "And Aaron and all the
elders of Israel," says the account already quoted, "came
to eat bread with Moses' father in law" before Yahweh.
Notice also that Aaron and the elders of Israel, to the
exclusion of Moses, the most important personage con-
cerned in the movement, are mentioned as partaking of
* Readers who have been trained in the objective, literalistic theol-
ogy may think it strange that we do not assert the fact of a super-
natural divine interference in harmony with Biblical claims. But it is
not properly an object of an examination of this kind to inquire whether
there was either an extrinsic or an intrinsic divine guidance of events.
As a matter of personal opinion, we do not think that the history in
question will bear the specific interpretation put upon it by the Biblical
writers. That is to say, we do not believe that anything occurred in
this stage of Israel's history (nor any other stage, for that matter)
which was out of the usual order of nature and human nature as we.
experience them now. But while we think it proper to express the
belief that the history of Israel will not bear the specific interpretation
put upon it by the Biblical writers, we do not feel called upon in this
connection to state our views on the question whether or not the gen-
eral interpretation put upon Israelitish history by the Biblical writers
is true. This last is, after all, the critical religious question; and any
discussion of it here would be out of place.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 105
the sacrificial meal with Jethro the priest. Why was not
Moses included in this? The answer is, that Moses is
not specially mentioned in connection with this ceremony
because, according to primitive custom, he had already
allied himself with Yahweh and the Kenites by marriage
and adoption into the tribe. Any further ceremony on
Moses' account would have been superfluous. Therefore
it is that Aaron and the elders of Israel, to the exclusion
of Moses, are mentioned as eating the sacrifice with Jethro
the priest.
Under ordinary conditions the adoption by strangers
of the god of a tribe means that the political and social
identity of the strangers is merged in that of the earlier
worshippers of the god. So that it would seem, on first
sight, as if the Israelites ought to have become Kenites
by this transaction instead of retaining, as they did, their
own political identity and even largely absorbing the
Kenites. But under ordinary conditions the incoming
strangers bear a smaller ratio to the original worshippers
than the Israelites did to the Kenites; they are either
married into the tribe, or adopted, or conquered by it;
and they affiliate with the worshippers first, then with the
god through the worshippers. In this case the circum-
stances were all reversed. The Israelites outnumbered the
Kenites, or at least those of the Kenites who accompanied
them into Canaan; they were neither conquered nor
adopted by the Kenites, nor received through the door of
marriage; and they regarded themselves as having affili-
ated with the god when leaving Egyptian territory, before
associating with his earlier worshippers.
And thus we see the historical basis for the tradition
that Yahweh chose the Israelites, and delivered them out
of Egypt (43).
We have adverted to the probable Kenite derivation
of Yahweh by way of preliminary to the secular history of
Israel. We do not assert dogmatically that Yahweh was
derived from the Kenites; but we accept this view pro-
visionally.
106 ^A^ EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
It is certain that the Old Testament literature shows
persistent and unmistakable traces of the association of
Yahweh with the region of Mount Sinai, the home of the
Kenites. In Deuteronomy 33 : 2 we read : "Yahweh came
from Sinai, and rose from Seir unto them; he shined
forth from Mount Paran." The terms "Paran^' and "Seir"
are connected with the Sinai region. In Judges 5 : 4 we
read: "Yahweh, thou wentest forth out of Seir." In
Habakkuk 3:3 we read : "The Holy One came from
Mount Paran." The tradition in 1 Kings 19 sends the
prophet Elijah, in a season of discouragement, to Horeb,
as Mount Sinai is otherwise called, Finally, in Hosea 12 :
9 and elsewhere, the national deity is made to declare, "I
am Yahweh thy god from the land of Egypt." The per-
sistence of the association of Yahweh with Sinai is ex-
plained, we think, partly by the fact that, as god of the
Kenites, he was once actually thought to live in the Sinai
region, and partly by the fact that the Israelite conquest
of Canaan was not a sudden event, but a long process
wherein, so to speak, Yahweh was drawn slowly (in the
thought of his worshippers) from his old home on Sinai
to his new home in the land of Canaan.
§ 57. — But the worship of Yahweh did not of itself
comprehend the early religion of Israel. Along w^ith the
general worship of the national god there went the special
and more primitive worship of family gods. These little
gods were represented by images called "teraphim;" and
their worship corresponded to the ancestor worship of
the Chinese and the Eomans. We find an instance of this
private, local religion in the case of Micali the Ephraim-
ite, as set forth in Judges 17. Micah's mother dedicated
eleven hundred pieces of silver to religious objects. She
"took two hundred pieces of silver, and gave them to
the founder, w^ho made thereof a graven image and a mol-
ten image: and it was in the house of Micah. And the
man Micah had an house of gods, and he made an ephod
and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who be-
came his priest." Later, the son was displaced by a Levite,
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 107'
who was hired by Micah for his food, clothing, and ten
pieces of silver per year. This religious establishment ac-
quired no small reputation. Among its patrons were the
Danites, who were so pleased with the counsel they had
received from its oracle that they stole the priest, the tera-
phim, and the entire outfit. Another instance, from a
later period of Israelite history, is equally interesting:
When king Saul tried to slay David, Michal, the wife of
David, let him down through the window. "And Michal
took the teraphim, and laid it in the bed, and put a pillow
of goats' hair at the head thereof, and covered it with the
clothes. And when Saul sent messengers to take David
she said. He is sick. And Saul sent messengers to see
David, saying, bring him up to me in the bed that I may
slay him. And when the messengers came in, behold the
teraphim was in the bed with the pillow of goats' hair at
the head thereof (I Samuel 19). In further illustration
of this point, we find in the legends of Genesis, chapter 31,
that when Rachel eloped with Jacob, she stole the tera-
phim of Laban, her father. This account does not have to
be historical to serve our present purpose. At the least, it
reflects the religious ideas of the people among whom it
originated and gained currency. Continuing we read that
the angry father, Laban, said to Jacob, "Wherefore hast
thou stolen my gods? And Jacob answered and said to
Laban . . . With whomsoever thou findest thy gods,
he shall not live . . . For Jacob knew not that
Rachel had stolen them. And Laban went into Jacob's
tent, and into Leah's tent, and into the tent of the two
maidservants; but he found them not. And he went out
of Leah's tent, and entered Rachel's tent. Now Rachel
had taken the teraphim, and put them in the camel»
furniture, and sat upon them."
§ 58. — A darker feature of these barbaric times was
human sacrifice, which was practiced among the Israelites
as among other primitive peoples. In 2 Samuel 21 w^e find
an illustration of this as follows :
108 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
"And there was a famine in the days of David three
yearSj year after year ; and David sought the face of Yah-
weh. And Yahweh said, It is for Saul, and for his bloody
house, because he put to death the Gibeonites. And the
king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them. What
shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make atone-
ment that ye may bless the inheritance of Yahweh? And
the Gibeonites said unto him. It is no matter of silver or
gold between us and Saul, or his house; neither is it for
us to put any man to death in Israel. And he said, What
ye shall say, that will I do for you. And they said unto
the king. The man that consumed us, and that devised
against us, that we should be destroyed from remaining
in any of the borders of Israel, let seven men of his sons
be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto Yah-
weh. And the king said, I will give them . . . And
he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and
they hanged them in the mountain before Yahweh, and
they fell all seven together : and they were put to death."
Another instance is found in 1 Samuel 15 : 33, where
we read that Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before Yahweh
in Gil gal. A better known case is that recorded in
Judges 11 — the sacrifice of Jephtha^s daughter (44).
§ 59. — Another important feature of the thought of
the Israelites is found in their ideas of death and the
other world. They had no doctrine of immortality, pro-
perly so called. In Psalm 6, for instance, the writer says,
"Eeturn Yahweh; deliver my soul: save me for thy lov-
ing-kindness' sake. For in death there is no remembrance
of thee: In Sheol who shall give thee thanks?'' And
again, in Psalm 39, we read, "O spare me, that I may re-
cover strength, before I go hence, and be no more." A
psalm preserved in Isaiah 38 says, "For sheol cannot
praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee : they that go
down mlo the pit cannot hope for thy truth. The living,
the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day." In
Ecclesiastes 9:5 we read : "The shades [wrongly trans-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 109"
lated ^dead'] know not anything; neither have they any
more a reward ; for the memory of them is forgotten."
But while it is plain that no doctrine of immortality
in the modern sense was cherished in Israel, it is equally
clear that the Israelites, in common with other primitive
people, had some positive, as well as negative, ideas about
the ghost world. The references to the underworld,
quoted above, do not imply the idea that the "refaim," or
shades, were thought to be absolutely dead, like stocks
and stones. They were thought to lead a shadowy, color-
less existence, deprived of all that makes life worth liv-
ing. It was believed that they could be called back for a
few minutes by spiritual mediums, or necromancers. The
story of king Saul consulting the witch of Endor, found in
1 Samuel 28, illustrates this:
"Said Saul unto his servants. Seek me a woman that
hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and inquire
of her. And his servants said to him. Behold, there is a
woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor. And Saul
disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and went, he
and two men with him, and they came to the woman by
night: and he said. Divine unto me, I pray thee, by the
familiar spirit, and bring me up whomsoever I shall name
unto thee . . . Then said the woman. Whom shall
I bring up unto thee? And he said. Bring me up Samuel.
And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud
voice. . . And the woman said unto Saul, I see a god
coming up out of the earth.* And he said unto her. What
* This is probably reminiscent of the fact that the gods were
developed originally from the heroic dead. The same term is applied to
the mighty dead, to the divinities worshiped by the living, and also to
living great men like judges, as in Exodus 21: 6 and 22: 8. In these
Exodus passages the seventeenth century English version translates the
Hebrew word "elohim" by the term "judges," without explanation. The
Revised Version, however, in both cases, translates the term with the
word "God," and places the word "judges" in the margin. Compare
Psalm 82:1, where the old version translates the word "elohim" with.
110 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up;
and he is covered with a robe. And Saul perceived that
it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground,
and did obeisance. And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast
thou disquieted me to bring me up?"
Of course, w^e do not necessarily have to take this ac-
count as wholly, or even partly, historical in order to use
it for the illustration of our point. Many of these Bible
stories are no truer in the literal sense than corresponding
tales among the Greeks, Romans, and Indians. The story
may have grown out of an actual interview between king
Saul and a witch, or it may have been a myth originating
after the death of Saul. In either case it illustrates the
primitive idea that the shades are not wholly devoid of
life. To the same effect is the reference in 2 Kings 21 : 6
which states that king Manasseh used enchantments, and
dealt with them that had familiar spirits, and with wiz-
ards. The many well known passages regarding spiritual
mediums, all through the Old Testament, prove that the
shades were thought to retain some power of life. A
wholesale revival of the shades is depicted in Isaiah
14 : 9-12, where we read : "Sheol from beneath is moved
for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the
refaim [shades] . . . All they shall answer and say
unto thee. Art thou also become weak as we? art thou be-
come like unto us?''
It becomes evident by this hasty and inadequate
sketch that the primitive religious ideas of the Is-
raelites were on a level with ideas prevailing everywhere
throughout the primitive world at a corresponding stage
of culture (45). To some readers, the above observations
and citations w^ill be novel. To the scholar, if he care to
read them, they will serve only as a hasty review. In any
case they are a necessary introduction to the sociological
and historical treatment now to follow.
the phrase "the mighty," and the new version translates with "God."
Also Genesis 6: 2, 4, where "the sons of elohim," translated "the sons
of God," are spoken of as coming in unto "the daughters of men."
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. Ill
§ 60. — The political condition of the land of Canaan
at the time of the attack by Israel was confused, and could
not well have been otherwise. In the centuries immedi-
ately preceding the Israelite Conquest, the land had been
ruled and fought over by at least three great oriental
powers. The Canaanites, as we have seen, had acknow-
ledged the overlordship of the old Babylonians for so long
that the language of the dominant race had been adopted
as a common medium of written communication among
the upper classes. In the fifteenth century b. c, however.
Babylonia was disturbed by an irresistible combination of
circumstances. She was troubled at home by the rising
military power of Assyria in the north ; while in Canaan
she was replaced by the northeastward advance of Egypt.
Governors from Egypt were placed in such Canaanite
cities as Jerusalem, Tyre, Askelon, Gezer, and Hazor. But
the rule of the Egyptians did not long extend over this re-
gion. In fact, before a century has passed, we find the gov-
ernors of these cities writing home for help, declaring
their inability to hold the country. Presently the land
was relinquished, partly to local Canaanitish tribes, and
partly to the Hittite kingdom whose seat was in Asia
Minor. It was between these moves on the great checker-
board of oriental politics that the barbarian Israelites,
with their primitive Yahwism, broke from the wilderness
into the land flowing with milk and honey (46).
§ 61. — The Conquest was not a well organized cam-
paign with a speedy issue. Beginning about 1,300 B. C,
it was carried forward by the different Israelitish tribes
in an irregular way over a long period of years. The
Canaanites were neither driven out nor annihilated, as
uncritical Bible readers are prone to imagine; although
many were of course killed in battle. A suggestive ac-
count is given in the first chapter of Judges. Commenc-
ing at verse 27, we read :
"And [the tribe of] Manasseh did not drive out the
inhabitants of Beth-shean and her towns, nor of Taanach
and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns,
112 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
nor tlie inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor
the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the
Canaanites would dwell in that land. And it came to
pass, when Israel was waxen strong, that they put the
Canaanites to taskwork, and did not utterly drive them
out. And [the tribe of] Ephraim drave not out the Cana-
anites that dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwelt in
Gezer among them. [The tribe of] Zebulun drave not out
the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol ;
but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tribu-
tary. [The tribe of] Asher drave not out the inhabitants
of Acco, nor the inhabitants of Zidon, nor of Ahlab, nor
of Achzib, nor of Helbah, nor of Aphik, nor of Rehob : but
the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabi-
tants of the land : for they did not drive them out. [The
tribe of] Naphtali drave not out the inhabitants of Beth-
anath ; but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants
of the land : and the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and of
Beth-anath became tributary unto them. And the Amor-
ites forced the children of Dan into the hill country ; yet
the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they
became tributary."
The Conquest, as we have said, was not an affair of
a day nor a year. It was a long and tedious process. The
adjustment of the newer and older inhabitants was not
complete until the age of the Judges had passed away. We
learn from 2 Samuel 5 : 6-10 that the Canaanitish Jebu-
sites were still in possession of Jerusalem in the early days
of king David, at least 150 years after the beginning of the
Conquest. "And the king and his men went to Jerusa-
lem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land:
which spake unto David saying. Thou shalt not come in
hither but the blind and the lame shall turn thee away.
Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion; the
same is the city of David."
§ G2. — In connection with these passages it becomes
plain that the history of Israel in Canaan illustrates, at
the very outset, the great and overshadowing fact of cleav-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 113
age into upper and lower classes. Cleavage, however, was
not originated by the Conquest. It existed among the
barbarian tribes of Israel in the desert, as in the case of
the nomadic Abraham with his many slaves, and as it
does among nomadic tribes now in that region. But the
passage of Israel from nomadism to settled life in Canaan
brought them into a more extensive relation with the in-
stitution of cleavage than ever before. Nor was cleavage
unknown to the Canaanites before the conquest by Israel,
for the "inhabitants of the land,'' like all oriental
peoples then and now, were not a free, democratic race.
They were stratified into upper and lower classes before
the Israelites appeared.
A brilliant sidelight on class relations in Israel is
afforded by a late passage in Leviticus 25 : 39-47, as fol-
lows :
"If thy brother be waxen poor with thee, and sell him-
self unto thee, thou shalt not make him to serve as a bond-
servant. As an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall
be with thee unto the year of jubilee. Then shall he
go out from thee. And as for thy bondmen, and thy bond-
maids, which thou shalt have of the nations that are round
about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen, and bondmaids.
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn
among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that
are with you ; and they shall be your possession. And ye
shall make them an inheritance for your children after
you, to hold them for a possession. Of them shall ye take
your bondmen forever."
An interesting bit of evidence in this connection is
furnished by the so-called "tenth commandment,'' re-
corded in Exodus 20 : 17. It is an injunction against covet-
ousness ; and in its innocent modern translation it reads :
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-
servant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor
anything that is thy neighbor's." The words rendered
"manservant" and "maidservant" would better have been
8
114 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
"man slave" and "woman slave" respectively. The slight-
est thought on the real nature of this well known injunc-
tion is enough to show that it would be without signifi-
cance in relation to these terms if the so-called "servants"
were not held as property. There is nothing wrong in
desiring your neighbor's free, hired servant. Manifestly,
then, this famous injunction presupposes a condition of
slavery. It puts human beings into the same category as
cattle and houses ; and in this respect it is an aristocratic
commandment.
In Genesis 9 we find an early legend which explains
and justifies the subjugation of the people of Canaan by
the Israelites. Canaan is depicted as outraging decency,
whereupon he is condemned by his father, Noah, in the
following words : "Cursed be Canaan. A servant of ser-
vants shall he be unto his brethren." To the same effect
is the Declaration of Jephtha, in Judges 11 : 24 : "Whom-
soever Yahweh, our god, hath dispossessed before us, them
will we possess."
Thus it begins to be plain that Israel was no excep-
tion to the law which we have put forward as a mighty
factor in social development. In our examination of this
interesting oriental people we must hold the fact of cleav-
age in full view in all its wide significance. To the trained
eye, the phenomena of cleavage will stand out conspicu-
ously through all the course of Israel's history.
§ 63. — The political disintegration which we have
noticed in Canaan before the Conquest made it possible
for the people of Yahweh to break up into their tribal
groups, and undertake the subjugation of the country in
detail. Herein we see the anarchical period of the
"Judges," when the people were not yet permanently
united in a single nation under a king.
Since they were not compelled to maintain a general
organization, the general religion of Israel, tended to fall
into neglect. Notice again how the religious and politi-
cal conditions of early society are bound up together. Yah-
weh, the covenant deity, was the one, general god of Is-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 116
rael; and the fate of his worship hung upon the realiza-
tion of an Israelite nationality. If, at this early stage in
its history, Israel should be permanently subjugated, the
religion of Yahweh would be cast aside and forgotten.
Under the actual conditions, however, Yahweh was not,
and could not be, wholly forgotten either by the Israelites
or the Canaanites. His worship went forward at the al-
tars in different parts of the country ; and the thought in
the background of the consciousness of Israelite and Cana-
anite alike w^as: "Yahweh is the one, general god of Is-
rael. He has led Israel out of Egypt — that great coun-
try ; — and has therefore defeated the gods of Egypt. He
has not only done this, but he has given Israel victories
and a foothold in this land. He must, therefore, be a great
and powerful god.'' If a united Israel, under the leader-
ship of Yahweh, had conquered a united Canaan under the
leadership of some other general god, then the general god
of Canaan would have been defeated with his followers;
and Yahweh would have risen at once to a higher place
than he actually occupied during the period of the Judges.
If we say that Yahweh had no immediate power to be-
come the preeminent "god of the land," we merely express
in theological terms the fact that Israel had no immediate
power to form a nation within the land.
§ 64. — In the third chapter of Judges we read that
^^the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites;"
and that "they took their daughters to be their wives, and
gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their
gods." As a matter of fact, the subjugation of the Cana-
anite inhabitants by the Israelite intruders was but a par-
tial one. After the Israelites had settled down in the
agricultural districts, leaving the Canaanites mostly in
the towns, there were treaties and intermarriages between
the two. Of this, however, more in due order. At pres-
ent, we are concerned with its theological aspect. As the
records indicate, the worship of Yahweh was gradually
associated with, but not superseded by, that of the local
deities of the Canaanites.
116 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
It needs to be emphasized that this was perfectly
natural under the circumstances. Israel and Yahweh had
indeed gained a foothold in the country, and had won
victories over the Canaanites and their local gods; but
they had neither driven out nor annihilated the Canaan-
ites, and hence had neither driven out nor permanently de-
feated their gods, or ^'baalim." The baalim of Canaan
were the gods of a settled and comparatively civilized
population, which was agricultural and commercial,
rather than military, in character; and these gods, of
course, reflected the nature of their worshippers. On the
other hand, Yahweh was a god of militant barbarians
who were fresh from the desert. He was a "god of hosts,
mighty in battle,'' as the Old Testament sometimes de-
scribes him. He was the dreadful god of Sinai, enthroned
on the black thunder clouds. And while he was wor-
shipped on important occasions, and held as a military
reserve, so to speak, it was inevitable that the pastoral
Israelites, when settling down and making treaties and
marriages with the agricultural and commercial inhabit-
ants of the land, should recognize and worship the local
baalim. For the Israelites were anxious to learn the arts
of agriculture and settled life; and to obtain success
therein it was thought necessary to serve, not a military
god, but the more civilized gods who had plainly given
wealth and success in life to a settled population. Ac-
cording to the standard of that age, the service of the
local baalim was no disloyalty to Yahweh, the general god
of Israel. The local baalim were worshipped only in a
subsidiary capacity. Israel did not recognize any god
who could compete with Yahweh in his own peculiar
field. His w^orship was associated with that of the local
baalim just as it was with the worship of the teraphim,
or little family gods. The service of these household
gods by people like Micah the Ephraimite, and David
and his wife Michal, and all the rest of Israel, did not
imply the denial of Yahweh as the general god of Israel.
In the same way, the recognition of the local Canaanite
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 117
gods involved no disloyalty to the god who had delivered
his chosen people from Egypt; and as the facts now to
be noticed prove, he was still regarded as preeminently
the god of Israel (47).
§ 65. — After the people of Yahv/eh had entered
Canaan, other attacks were made upon the land by still
other outsiders. As the Israelites gradually settled down
in the country districts, leaving the Canaanites mainly
in the towns and their vicinity, these attacks by out-
siders proved to be troublesome not only to the Israelites
but to the Canaanites as well. Enemies from without the
land had no reason for making a permanent distinction
between Canaan and Israel, for they were the enemies of
all the people in the territory they coveted. This at
length had the effect of creating a community of inter-
est and feeling between the older and newer inhabitants
of the land.
It was, indeed, attacks by the troublesome Philis-
tines and Ammonites that finally welded Israel and
Canaan into a single mass. And they were rallied
against these enemies — how? Assuredly, not in the
name of any one of the local baalim, for none of these
gods had a general jurisdiction. The only god wor-
shipped in Canaan who had a general jurisdiction was
Yahweh, the god of hosts, mighty in battle, whom the
Israelites held as a sort of military reserve. The combined
Israelites and Canaanites were therefore rallied against
their common enemies in the name of none other than
Yahweh, who had defeated the powerful gods of Egypt,
and given Israel a foothold in Canaan. Henceforth we
hear no more about conflicts between Israel and Canaan.
The tedious formative period of the Judges at length
passed away; and a national state was founded under
the headship of king Saul and his successors, in the name
of Yahweh, god of Israel. "The old population," writes
Wellhausen, "slowly became amalgamated with the new.
In this way the Israelites received a very important ac-
cession to their numbers. In Deborah's time the fighting
118 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
men of Israel numbered 40,000; the tribe of Dan, when
it migrated to Laish, counted 600 warriors; Gideon pur-
sued the Midianites with 300. But in the reigns of Saul
and David we find a population reckoned by millions.
The rapid increase is to be accounted for by the incor-
poration of the Canaanites" (48).
The situation here developed calls for close attention.
As Wellhausen observes, the assimilation of the older and
the newer inhabitants of the land never had the effect of
making Israelites Canaanites; but, on the contrary, it
made Canaanites Israelites (49). This is a very nice point,
turning obviously on the politico-religious phase of the
situation. The original Israelite tribes intruded them-
selves into the life of Canaan in somewhat the same way
that the Normans intruded themselves into the life of
England. It is true, we hasten to say, that the Israelites
placed their name on the land they conquered; while the
Normans did not turn England into a Normandy. But
the difference between the two situations is rather one
of form than of substance; and this is just the point
that w^e are trying to bring out. Prior to the Norman
Conquest, England had a national organization of her
own. Norman life simply flowed into the mould offered
by English life; and Normans thus became Englishmen.
"As early as the days of Henry the Second," writes Green,
"the descendants of Norman and Englishman had be-
come indistinguishable. Both found a bond in a com-
mon English feeling and English patriotism" (50).
But, on the other hand, Canaan, as we have re-
peatedly observed, had neither a national organi-
zation nor a national religion. So that in this
case it was the incomers, and not the original in-
habitants, that furnished the national mould, or matrix,
wherein the corporate life of the mingled peoples could
run. Thus the Canaanites, the earlier inhabitants of
the land, became Israelites.
Partly from a natural and naive tendency of mind
which predisposes men to exalt the simple and the dra-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 119
matic over the complex and the prosaic, and partly as a
matter of pride, the resulting mixed race magnified its
descent from the conquering Israelite stock, and rapidly
forgot its Canaanite ancestry. In coming years the in-
vasion of the land by the tribes of Israel projected it-
self into bold relief against the historical background,
while the silent, prosaic intermingling of the races made
no impression on the popular mind. Everybody, of
course, wanted to be known as descended from the con-
querors and not from the conquered. In later generations
these tendencies logically issued in the tradition that
their ancestors came into the country and dispossessed
the alien Canaanites. This is, indeed, one of the stock
ideas of the uncritical Bible reader of today; and unless
we take the trouble to look below the surface, and hold
the basic elements of the situation steadily in mind, it
neatly conceals a number of important sociological facts.
In marriages between the old and the new inhabitants
of the land, it is plain that alliances would be contracted
largely between the families of the Israelite chiefs and
elders, who had seized the undefended agricultural dis-
tricts, and the families of the Canaanite upper class,
which resided principally in the towns.* The mixture
of the races, however, would be effected in many other
ways, regular and irregular.
At the outset, the balance of power in the new Is-
raelite nation lay naturally with the country aristocracy,
which was of the most pure Israelite blood. Accordingly,
it is the country, with its agricultural interests, that we
hear of more than of the city during the early life of Israel
in Canaan. Gideon, as we have incidentally observed, was
a clan chief in the agricultural districts. Saul, before
* Perhaps a typical marriage of this kind was that between Gideon,
an Israelite clan chief, and a woman of the Canaanite city of Shechem
(Judges 8: 31 and 9). The issue of this union was the ill-fated Abimelech.
It was Gideon's family, by the way, that headed the first, abortive at-
tempt to avoid the evils of the troubled age of the Judges by founding a
monarchy. Strictly, Saul was not the first king in Israel.
120 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
his election to the throne, busies himself in directing the
affairs of the family estate in the country. David, the
next king, begins life as a shepherd boy ; and, in the early
part of his career, marries the widow of a rich country
landlord.
But intermarriages between the Israelite and Cana-
anite upper classes presently produced families which in-
herited both city and country property. This tended to
carry the balance of power into the cities, which were
wealthy long before the Conquest. The shifting of the
center of influence in this direction probably became no-
ticeable even in the reign of David. At a later period in
his career he brought the city of Jerusalem into promin-
ence, and identified himself with it so closely that it be-
came known as "the city of David." The third king,
Solomon, was wholly a city man ; and under him we may
imagine the process of amalgamation as being complete,
and the balance of power — at least, of economic power
— as on the way toward permanent location in the cities
of Oanaanitish Israel.
§ 66. — A fact which calls for emphatic notice
emerges into view at this point. The history of "Israel''
in Canaan must be regarded, not as later chapters in
the history of the original Israelitish tribes, but rather
as a continuation of the prior history of Canaan. From
the standpoint of science, the phrase "history of Israel,"
as commonly understood, is misleading. The Israelite
invasion brought a temporary, backset to the country;
but after the races had been peacefully united under the
kings, the resulting progress which we associate with the
names of David and Solomon, was really Canaanite pro-
gress under the name and style of Israel. We should
realize, then, that we are studying the history of society
in Canaan rather than merely the history of Israel. If
we continue the subject under the impression that we are
simply studying the later history of the original tribes of
Israel, we delude ourselves in the same fashion as when
we loosely imagine that the Israelites took possssion of
1^
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 121
Canaan and "drove out" the earlier inhabitants. Both
of these ideas are conventional conceptions which hide
serious facts to which we must frequently recur.
§ 67. — But since primitive politics and religion go
together, it is necessary to turn once more to the religious
aspect of this history.
We have seen that Yahweh w^as once a tribal god.
But the rise of Canaanitish Israel brought with it the
rise of Yahweh among the gods of the nations — that is,
in the minds of his worshippers. Let us try to study the
religious psychology of Israel under the united monarchy,
during the "golden age" of David and Solomon.
First of all, perhaps, there was the imposing tradi-
tion that Yahweh had chosen Israel, defeated the gods of
Egypt on their behalf, and given them the land of Canaan.
We have seen how much and how little basis there was
for this; but it was taken more and more at its face
value. Its dramatic force increased with the passage of
time as the Canaanite side of the nation's ancestry be-
came lost in the Israelitish descent of the mingled people.
The Philistines on the southwest were so effectually chas-
tized that they ceased to harass the Israelites. Therefore
Dagon, the god of the defeated Philistines, had been de-
feated by Yahweh, and must take a lower place than the
god of the victorious Israelites. Furthermore, the Moa-
bites, the Ammonites, the Edomites, and the Syrians, or
Arameans, located on the east and northeast, were de-
feated and put to tribute by Israel. The nomadic Amale-
kites were also severely chastized. Therefore the gods
of all these peoples fell below the level of the great
deity of Israel, who was plainly showing himself to be a
god of hosts, or armies, mighty in battle. The commercial
Phoenicians on the northwest were not a warlike race;
and since they never came into hostile contact with Yah-
weh's people, their gods did not at first impress the reli-
gious consciousness of Canaanitish Israel. The Babylon-
ians, having long ago retreated to their distant homeland,
were too far away to exercise any influence on the imagin-
122 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ation of Israel during its formative period. And since the
Assyrian kingdom had not at this time grown powerful
enough to throw its armies upon the Mediterranean sea-
board, out of sight was out of mind in this case also.
Thus Yahweh had proved his superiority over all gods
with whom he had actually come into contact ; and it was^
a natural inference that, if he chose, he could as easily
defeat the gods of the nations with whom Israel had not
so far come into relation.
Thus we see how the circumstances of this period ex-
alted the idea of the power of Yahweh, especially in the
minds of his Israelite worshippers. The growth of Yah-
weh — or more exactly, the growth of the idea of Yahweh
— was the religious aspect of the increasing political
importance of the newly founded nation of Israel. Of
course, the relative importance of Israel in the world was
less than the Israelite imagined it to be; and in the same
way the greatness of Yahweh would bulk larger in the
mind of the Israelite than to the eyes of the world out-
side. We are studying Yahweh, however, not as he ap-
peared to the outside world, but as he existed in the con-
sciousness of his people.
The atmosphere in which the Israelite found himself
in the reigns of David and Solomon was, indeed, w^ell
fitted to give rise to expansive ideas about the importance
and destiny of Israel, and, therefore, of the greatness of
his god and the littleness of the gods of other nations.
It is a well known fact that every ancient conquering na-
tion tended to ascribe to its own god supremacy over the
gods of the rest of the world. "Assur was supreme over
all other gods,'' writes Professor Sayce, "as his repre-
sentative, the Assyrian king, was supreme over the other
kings of the earth'' (51). The same spirit of pride that
impels the small boy to think and assert that his country
can defeat all other countries in war, and that his father
can whip the fathers of all other boys, was naturally at
work in the politico-religious consciousness of Israel at
this relatively happy period of national poAver and glory.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 123^
"There has probably never existed, in any age or at any
spot on the earth's surface," writes Mr. Fiske, "a group of
people that did not take for granted its own preeminent
excellence. Upon some such assumption, as upon an in-
controvertible axiom, all historical narratives, from the
chronicles of a parish to the annals of an empire, alike
proceed" (52). It is inductively probable that, just as
the Assyrians, when flushed by their military successes,
held the gods of other nations in contempt, so the senti-
ment grew up in Israel that foreign gods were weaklings
to be despised. It was, indeed, a part of the duty of
every man in ancient times to think well of his own god,
and ill of the gods of others. If his people were perma-
nently conquered by another people, then, of course, the
god of his conquerors was more powerful than his own
god. But if, on the contrary, his own people subjugated
others, then the latent tendency of every man to think
well of his own god as a matter of self interest was
brought into play and justified. We must not suppose
that even in the case of a great conquering power like
Assyria, the tendency to magnify one's own god and to
hold the gods of other nations in contempt, issued in
downright denial of the existence of foreign deities. The
general god of a conquering nation was thought by his
people to hold the same place of supremacy with refer-
ence to foreign gods that his people held with reference
to foreign peoples. And just as, in the mind of the small
boy, the importance of other nations than his own tends
to drop toward the zero point, so, in the thought of an-
cient conquerors, the dignity of outside peoples and for-
eign gods tended to diminish to the lowest point compati-
ble with the fact of their existence. The mere existence of
outside gods was not denied — even in Israel down to
the last, as we shall see in due time; but the psychology
of primitive conquering societies tended to magnify their
own gods in the largest possible degree, and to minify the
gods of outsiders in the largest possible degree, thus open-
ing a profound quantitative chasm between the religions
124 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
of conquerors and the religions of the outside world. Al-
most every primitive god, indeed, may be regarded as, in
a sense, potentially the god of the whole earth and heaven.
There are no absolute limits to the power of the gods in
the minds of their worshippers. It is uncertain what a
god may or may not do, just as it is uncertain what a man
may or may not do. This is especially true of a covenant
god, like Yahweh, for his worshippers have not grown up
with him; and they are, therefore, more uncertain about
him than about gods with whom they are more familiar.
There can be no doubt that these general tendencies
were at work in Israel during the period here under sur-
vey. They did not produce the doctrine of an absolutely
imperial god, such as the later prophets proclaimed;
but the foundations of that doctrine were laid in the
"golden age" of Israel's national history.*
§ 68. — It should be emphasized that the enlarged
idea of Yahweh arose in the common consciousness of
Canaanitish Israel, just as ideas about the gods of other
nations grew in the minds of their worshippers. Yahweh
had not yet become a world-god; but he was on the way
to that exalted eminence; and nobody could tell what this
dreadful covenant deity might do, nor how many foreign
gods he might subjugate. He grew in the minds of his
people as a reflex of the political situation. His great-
ness was obvious. It called for no special revelation from
lieaven, for anyone could see it.
But although the greatness of Yahweh needed not
the word of revelation, it is inductively probable that
persons arose under the united monarchy, as well as be-
fore that time, to give authoritative expression to the
common tradition. Such persons were not necessarily
* Some readers may interpose here the point that since Israel was
completely and permanently defeated at a later period, and since Yahweh
nevertheless finally became the imperial god of earth and heaven, the
line of thought here working out is inconsistent with some important
fact which we have overlooked. We leave this puzzzle, however, to solve
itself at a later stage of our survey.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 12b-
specialists, who did nothing save make declarations about
divine things. In later Israelite history the function of
prophecy, or preaching, or forthspeaking, on behalf of
divinity concentrated itself in specialists known as
"nebiim'^ (translated "prophets"). But the further back
we go in Israelite history and in general history, the more
common is it for any extraordinary person to be regarded
as an authoritative source of the divine word. In the
earlier history of Israel the authoritative word from the
divine, or concerning the divine, was uttered by seers,
priests, kings, extraordinary women like Deborah, and
leaders like Moses, all of whom combined in themselves
many functions. The prophetic side of the character of
Moses, for instance, is recognized by later prophets
( Hosea 12 : 13 ; Deuteronomy 18 : 15, 18 ; 34 : 10). At first,
the inspiration of deeds and of words was thought to fall
upon the same person. The political head of the people
could not only be an inspired leader of action; he could
also give out the inspired word. Moses, as just observed,
was regarded as a prophet in one aspect of his character.
Samuel, the last of the judges, could be at once judge,
priest, and seer. A valuable editorial footnote in 1 Sam-
uel 9 explains that "beforetime in Israel, when a man
went to inquire of God [elohirri], thus he said, Come and
let us go to the seer [roeh] : for he that is now called a
prophet [nahi] was beforetime called a seer." King Saul
could be "among the prophets." Even David and Solo-
mon — more in the eyes of later generations — could be
regarded as giving out inspired words in psalm and
proverb. It is significant that the prophetic reputation
of kings David and Solomon should be greater in the eyes
of posterity than of contemporaries, for under the united
monarchy, in accordance with the law of specialization
everywhere at work in development, prophecy at length
disengaged itself from political leadership, and began to
pursue a more independent course. Persons began to
come into prominence who were specially known as forth-
speakers of Yahweh (nebiim). The names of some sucb
126 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
individuals, coming down to us from the period of the
united kingdom and just subsequent thereto, are: Nathan,
Ahijah, Shemaiah, and Iddo. There are also mentioned
a number of prophets whose names are not given.
None of these prophets have left us any writings;
but it was doubtless ainong them that the first crude
conceptions of Yahweh's greatness received authoritative
statement. In the early age of the two Israelite kingdoms
there were still other prophets from whom we have no
writings — men like Elijah, Micaiah ben Imlah, Jehu ben
Hanani, Elisha, as well as many who are mentioned but
not named; and these, also, doubtless had their share
in defining the greatness of the covenant god of Israel.
The prophets of later centuries — like Amos, Isaiah, and
Jeremiah, — whose writings we possess, utter in terms
of increasing clearness the doctrine of Yahweh^s imperial
supremacy; but not one of them is conscious that this is
a novel conception, even though we can trace later stages
of its growth in the writings of these very prophets. The
psychology of all the literary prophets implies an ag-
grandizement of the national god such as can have come
only before the age of written prophecy.
Several facts, then, taken together, make it prac-
tically certain that under the national kingdom Yahweh
was authoritatively declared to be an imperialistic god
by men who were thought to be in close touch with him
and inspired by him. First, the political history of Israel
exalted the idea of Yahweh in the consciousness of all his
worshippers. In the second place, prophets arose who
would naturally give expression to the common idea. In
the third place, the psychology, or general mental attitude,
of the literary prophets of later centuries proves that
these later men did not regard themselves as innovators.
§ 69. — Throughout this period, and for centuries af-
terward, the local baalim, or agricultural and city gods
of the earlier Canaanites, were worshipped in the char-
acter of minor deities. The service of the baalim was con-
tinued as a part of the religion of the people because
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 127
of the qualified nature of the Conquest, as previously ex-
plained. The baalim were symbolic of the Canaanitish
element in the descent of the mixed population. Several
of the agricultural feasts held by the earlier Canaanites
in honor of these gods, as well as the lewd practices in
<!onnection with the "high places,^' were continued in con-
nection with the Yahwism of Canaanitish Israel. The
local gods, however, were not to be compared to Yahweh,
the god of all Israel ; and, as we have already seen, theii^
worship, like that of the teraphim, was not commonly held
to be inconsistent with the practice of the national re-
ligion.
§ TO. — Canaanitish Israel was a united nation for
about 100 years — through the reigns of Saul, David and
Solomon. The capital was fixed at Jerusalem in the
south; and a temple was built there for the god of Is-
rael. Peace and firm government within the country
brought with it social recovery and progress, and quickly
elevated Israel to a place among the nations. Oriental
civilization was introduced — or, to be more accurate, re-
vived and stimulated after the temporary backset caused
by the Conquest.
In the reign of Solomon friendly alliances were made
with surrounding nations ; and since recognition of a peo-
ple involved recognition of its god (politics and religion
going hand in hand), altars were set up in Israel for the
worship of the deities of Egypt, Phoenicia, Moab, and Am-
mon — probably on soil transported from those countries.
§ 71. — But in spite of the apparent prosperity of the
country, trouble was brewing. The social condition of
Israel was rapidly assimilated to that of the oriental
world at large.
The first dramatic incident in its decline occurred
upon the accession of Eehoboam to the throne of Solomon
his father. The weight of taxation had rested more
heavily upon the northern part of the kingdom than upon
Judah in the south, where the seat of government was
located; and Eehoboam would consent to no reforms. In
128 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
consequence, the larger part of the kingdom — the so-
called "ten tribes" in the north — rebelled against the
dynasty seated at Jerusalem. This was about 940 b. c.
Thenceforward there were two lines of kings — one for
Judah in the south and one for Israel in the north; and
all Israel was never again politically united as a nation.
The consciousness of a common origin, however, was not
forgotten ; and Yahweh was still acknowledged as the god
of the sundered people.*
The troubles of Israel now increased. Eehoboam
tried to reduce the insurrection in the north, where Jero-
boam had been chosen king. Meanwhile, Shishak, who
was then king of Egypt, invaded Judah. The internal
decay of once powerful Egypt was exposing it more and
more to the assaults of its enemies. As population multi-
plied throughout the eastern world, kingdoms pressed
upon each other, nations rising and falling, with no sta-
bility anywhere, and increasing distress everywhere. The
assault upon Judah by Egypt recalled Rehoboam to the
south, and relieved the pressure on the north. Some years
later the scales were turned; and the north, under king
Baasha, pressed so hard upon the southern kingdom that
Asa, the son of Rehoboam, was forced to call upon king
Benhadad of Damascus for help. And so the tides of war
surged back and forth.
After the division of the kingdom, the history of Is-
rael is a record of gradual decline, interrupted by oc-
casional returns of apparent good fortune, at least for the
upper class. The northern kingdom was destined to be
largely depopulated by the Assyrians, giving rise to the
legend of the "ten lost tribes." The kingdom of little
Judah was to gather up into itself the traditions of Is-
rael's history. Part of its population were at length to
* In respect of the terms "Israel" and "Judah" the usage varies in
the Old Testament literature ; but in the present inquiry this point need
not be enlarged upon. The Judahites were Israelites in a broad sense;
but after the division the term "Israel" was, apptied to them only on the
more formal occasions.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 129
be exiled. Of these, again, part were to return ; and, un-
der the name of "Jews," to erect a little ecclesiastical
state, subject for the most part now to one power and now
to another, and ultimately to be destroyed by the Roman
arms.
Thus we see that the kingdom which came so tri-
umphantly into the light of history, under the glorious
leadership of the terrible covenant god Yahweh, pursued
a comparatively brief career before its best days were
over. We hardly trace its rise before we chronicle its
commencing decline.
§ 72. — The evil turn in the fortunes of Canaanitish
Israel resulted at length in a great religious ferment
which, advancing through ever widening circles, has in-
fluenced the later religious history of the entire civilized
world. We have seen that the rise of Yahwism was con-
nected with the rise of Israel among the nations; and it
is manifest that the later religious ferment which we are
presently to study was equally based upon material de-
cline.
The central question is. What was it that brought
trouble upon the country? What was it that caused the
decline of Israel? Was it the increasing attacks by out-
siders? Or was it internal conditions? Or was it a com-
bination of internal and external causes? Or, more
broadly and simply, was it a local manifestation of the
general social decay then creeping over the entire
oriental world?
The evidence upon which our general thesis is based
leads us to support the affirmative side of the latter
form of the question. It will be recalled, indeed, that our
entire digression upon the history of Israel is based on
the view that this history brings out to good effect the
general conditions of the oriental social problem.
§ 73. — As troubles thickened, and the period of the
united kingdom receded into the past, there grew up, as
was but natural, an ever brighter tradition of the glory
9
130 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
and happiness of the golden age under David and Solo-
mon. We see the marks of this in 1 Kings 4 : ^^Judah and
Israel were many, as the sand which is by the sea in mul-
titude, eating and drinking and making merry. And
Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine
and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beersheba, all
the days of Solomon.'^ This passage was composed, not
during the period of the united kingdom, but after the
division, at a time when it had become customary to
speak of the people of Yahweh under the double form,
"Judah and Israel." The tradition represented by the
passage was, of course, an idealizing tradition; but that
made no difference. Distance often obscures details, and
lends enchantment to the view. When we are in difficulty
we always like to erect some standard of perfection to
which we can refer as an ideal. If our earlier experiences
have realized any of this ideal, we tend to paint the
former times in the brightest colors ; to set the apparently
happy past over against the unhappy present; and to
accept the resulting tradition of an earlier golden age at
its full face value. The passage here taken from 1 Kings
4 shows all the marks of a characteristic idealization of
earlier history. Notice that all its terms go to extremes.
"In the good old days,'' it says in eflect/' everybody dwelt
safely, every man under his oivn vine and fig tree, from
one extreme of the country to the other — from Dan in the
north to Beersheba in the south. There were so many
people that they could not be counted. They were like
the sand by the sea, or the stars of the heaven, in multi-
tude; and they were all eating, and drinking, and mak-
ing merry." More specific imi)lications of this passage
will be noticed later.
All that we know about earlier and later times points
to the fact that internal social conditions grew steadily
worse in the century following the division of the king-
dom. This was not a result of the division, but an out-
come of the deeper forces presently to be studied with
care. In this period it was naturally the desire of the
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 131
people of Canaanitish Israel to return somehow to the
imagijied felicity of the past. But their utter ignorance
precluded all intelligent effort looking to the correction
of social abuses; and the century following the division
has left us no record of any general or positive move-
ment of the public mind in either kingdom.
§ 74. — In the middle of the ninth century, however
(about 850 b. c), we meet several unmistakable signs that
public opinion was awakening slowly to a realization that
something must be done.
Ancient nations always ascribed their troubles to the
anger of the gods. Thus, in the foregoing quotation from
the Moabite Stone, king Mesha says, "Omri, king of Is-
rael, afflicted Moab for many days, because Chemosh Avas
angry with his land.'' The anger and malice of the gods
was thought to be due either to some ritualistic mistake
on the part of their worshippers, or to their own divine
caprice.
The first tendency of the people of Israel, in the midst
of their troubles, was to take this conventional view.
But along with the more primitive, conventional idea
that Israel's troubles were due to the capricious desertion
of his people by Yahweh there grew up another view,
which at length ripened into positive doctrine.
Setting out from the basis afforded by current tradi-
tions, the new doctrine advanced the startling claim that
Israel's troubles were due, not to the caprice of Yahweh,
but to the unfaithfulness of the people to their god. Yah-
weh had performed his side of the great contract made at
Mount Sinai; but his people had not lived up to their
side of it. Yahweh, the greatest god on earth, beside whom
other gods were small, had chosen Israel when it was in
trouble, delivered it from Egypt, made a contract with
it, conquered the land of Canaan for it, driven out the
inhabitants before its face, given every man his own vine
and fig tree, and subjugated surrounding nations. But
what had Israel rendered unto Yahweh in return for all
these benefits? Israel had served the baalim, the gods of
132 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the former inhabitants of the country! Israel had raised
altars and built temples in honor of foreign gods in the
very land which Yahweh had so graciously conquered
for his chosen people! Israel had been tried by a good
god and found wanting. Yahweh had done more than was
demanded by his part of the contract. He had given good
measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running
over. Let Israel return to the worship of Yahweh, accord-
ing to the pure and simple service of the wilderness days^
abhorring contact with the local baalim and the gods of
other nations; and then Yahweh would once more smile
upon his people, restore prosperity to the land of Israel,
and give every man his own vine and fig tree.
The new view was not less primitive than the old;
but its force lay in the fact that its opponents had no
means of overthrowing it. The advocate of the old, con-
ventional theology might claim that the troubles of Israel
were proof positive that Yahweh had "hidden his face
from his people.'' To this the new school would reply by
admitting the conventional claim in so far as it connected
Israel's misfortunes with the will of Yahweh ; but the new
school would add the important qualification that Yah-
weh had brought trouble upon Israel, not out of mere
caprice, like the gods of other nations, but as a punish-
ment, according to the immutable decrees of his di-
vine justice. Indeed, the new view would press hotly on
to the conclusion that Yahweh would not be the great god
that he had proved himself to be, and that all Israel had
admitted him to be, if he had not brought just this pun-
ishment upon his chosen people. His many benefits when
Israel had not deserved them in the first place, had
proved his willingness to live up to the divine side of the
contract; and if he had continued these benefits indefi-
nitely, while Israel still worshipped other gods and re-
fused him the undivided service that he had given his
chosen people, then he would have been mocking himself !
All these doctrines were logical deductions from the
premises afforded by current traditions. Grant the tra-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 133
ditions; and the deductions followed. King Mesha might
ascribe the troubles of Moab to the capricious anger of
Chemosh; but this view would not hold in the case of
Israel and Yahweh. Israel's god had brought trouble
upon his people as a just punishment. History had
proved that he was willing to do them good. The new
school would cite the Sinai covenant, and all the good-
ness of an electing god; and the old school could not
deny these propositions, for they were affirmed in com-
mon by the old and the new. Then the new school would
ask, "Is it not true that Israel has worshipped, and is
now serving, the baalim of the former inhabitants of the
country, and that Israel has officially recognized the gods
of other nations by building altars and temples to them
in the very land that Yahweh has conquered?" And to
this, also, the old school would be obliged to give an
affirmative answer. Then the new school would tri-
umphantly put the final question, "Is it not true that hap-
piness was the result of Yahweh's faithfulness to Israel,
while trouble has followed Israel's persistent unfaithful-
ness to Yahweh in mixing and confusing his worship with
the service of other gods? Yahweh chose Israel in pre-
ference to all the peoples of the earth; and Israel must
likewise cleave to him, putting away all other gods from
before his face, for he is a jealous god."
This doctrine, together with a moral element that
will emerge into view later, may possibly have been stated
in embryonic form by Moses. At all events, it now first
came into great public prominence; and we are inclined
to think that any ascription of the full blown form of it
to Moses, or to anybody before the first age of the two
kingdoms, is a reading backward of later ideas into an
earlier time. The historical point, however, is not im-
portant here; and we leave it to such settlement as it may
find within or without the present inquiry.
The new theology did not by any means take the pub
lie at once by storm. The great desideratum was to make
the people think. The old theology was consistent with
134 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the religious habits of the entire primitive world. Lazy
and easy going, it persisted in Israel down to the last.
But the new view gathered strength with age, and rose up
to combat the old.
§ 75. — The new view seems to have been crystallized
out of the indefinite religious ferment of the time by the
policy of king Ahab of the northern Israelite kingdom.
He married Jezebel, daughter of Etbaal, the king of Tyre;
and in honor of his wife, her country, and her god, the
Tyrian baal, Ahab had a temple erected at Samaria, his
capital city. That he still recognized Yahweh as the gen-
eral god of Israel is made evident by the fact that the
children born to him and Jezebel were given names com-
pounded with that of the Israelite god. Their daughter
was named Athaliah, or Athal-yah, which means, "Yah-
weh is great." One of their sons was named Jehoram,
or Yah-ram, which means, "Yahweh is high." Another
son was named Ahaziah, or Ahaz-yah, which means, "He
whom Yahweh supports." Not only did Ahab acknow-
ledge the national god in the names of his children; but
he also acknowledged Yahweh by consulting many of the
prophets of the Israelite god, as in 1 Kings 22. In build-
ing a temple to the Tyrian baal, Ahab intended no dis-
loyalty to the great god of Israel. His policy was nothing
new. Politics and religion went hand in hand. Recog-
nition of a foreign people involved recognition of its god
as a matter of course ; and so far as Israel was concerned,
the great Solomon had set a precedent for this very thing
in the days of the united kingdom. But the days of Ahab
were not the days of Solomon; and public opinion was
preparing slowly for the new doctrine.
§ 76. — In due time appeared the first great champion
of the new theology. The heroic figure of Elijah, or Eli-
yah, whose name signifies, "Yahweh is the god," looms up
in tremendous proportions amid the mists and shadows
of his age. His name echoes in the Old Testament litera-
ture and resounds in the books of the New Testament.
We cannot for a moment suppose that the new theology
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 135
was the creation of Elijah. Nor can we assume that the
increasing agitation of the public mind, which first be-
comes generally noticeable in his time, was due merely
to him. "Prophets do not speak until they must," says
Dr. Bruce, very truly. "They do not arise until they are
sorely needed, and then they come and give voice to the
burden that is on the heart of all like minded with them-
selves" (53). The prophet who makes an impression
upon his contemporaries is not the only white sheep in a
flock of black sheep. The leader of thought, like the
leader of action (and the two are much the same) gives per-
sonal expression to the forces at work in the society
around him. He does not make the social movement ; but
the movement makes him.
Politics and religion being united, it is obvious that
the religious consciousness, at the least reckoning, is one
phase, or aspect, of the social consciousness. Therefore
the testimony of the religious consciousness to the great
importance of the prophet Elijah is an authoritative
"source" of the first rank in the study of Israelite history
and sociology. In the centuries lying between the time
of Moses, the founder of political Israel, and the times now
under survey, no figure looms up like Elijah. This man,
indeed, can be regarded only as the first great representa-
tive of that notable succession of prophets, or "preachers,"
who, in the name of Yahweh, undertook the concrete
application of the new theology. It is not Samuel, nor
Ahijah, nor Amos, nor Hosea, nor Isaiah, nor Jeremiah,
but Elijah who is to appear before the final cataclysm of
the great and dreadful "Day of Yahweh" (Malachi 4: 5).
And it is not these other prophets, but Elijah^ again,
whom the social consciousness deems worthy of associa-
tion with Moses, the founder of political Israel, and Jesus,
the founder of spiritual Israel, in the dramatic scene of
the great Transfiguration on the Mount (Matthew 17:3;
Mark 9:4; Luke 9 : 30).
Elijah, unlike his successors the literary prophets,
has left us no writings of his own; and the accounts of
136 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
him contained in the books of Kings as they now stand are
plainly encrusted with myths, like the accounts handed
down to us concerning many of the famous characters of
ancient times, both inside and outside the Bible. But if
the miracle stories must be given up, it is very certain
that Elijah strongly opposed the policy of king Ahab,
denouncing the worship of the Tyrian baal, and probably
also the service of the local baalim of Canaanitish Israel.
Elijah goes down into history, not because he was a physi-
cal magician, but because he was the first great spokes-
man of the new theology. It does not seem probable that
he reached the clearness of expression which we find in
the famous writing prophets who lived in later centuries.*
But his platform contained in the germ all the doc-
trine of subsequent prophecy. And just as his views were
brought out more clearly by later men, so the problem
which the new theology tried to solve became clearer in
its conditions and more awful in its pressure during the
period wherein these later men preached and wrote.
The most dramatic event in Elijah's career seems to
have been concerned, not with miraculous fire from heaven,
but with affairs of the earth in a very literal sense. It
is in precisely the most sober part of the Elijah-narratives
that we find the account of this event. According to the
narrative alluded to ( 1 Kings 21), one of the smaller aris-
tocracy of Israel, Naboth by name, owned a piece of land
in the neighborhood of the palace of king Ahab. The king
tried to buy this land, offering in exchange either another
piece of property or the worth of it in money. But Na-
both, who may have been speculating for a rise, refused
to sell. Then queen Jezeb.el treacherously procured the
judicial murder of Naboth; and Ahab went to take
possession of the coveted property. The incident gave
Elijah an opportunity which he was quick to improve.
*We recognize that the books of the later prophets, as they now
stand in the canon, have been edited and enlarged by still later unknown
writers animated by the prophetic spirit.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 137
Boldly making his way into the royal presence itself, he
■confronted the king with an awful curse.
It should be emphasized that the significance of this
Ahab-Naboth case lay not alone in the treacherous and
violent manner in which Naboth was dispossessed. The
treachery which, in this instance, attended the transfer
of land from one of the less conspicuous upper-class fami-
lies to the most conspicuous upper-class family in the
kingdom, was of course unjustifiable; but it throws out
into bold relief, as by a lightning flash, a silent process
of economic concentration which has been illustrated
•equally by the oriental, classic, and western civilizations
in their later stages. The literary prophets of the follow-
ing century, as we shall see later, complain about this pro-
cess in the most bitter terms. On the law of chances,
the members of the upper social stratum never possess
the same amount of property apiece; and the underlying
economic conditions of society are such that when civili
zation enters a certain stage the upper class begins to
contract upon itself, as well as to increase relatively in
wealth and powder, its weaker members being ruined and
forced into the lower social stratum. The special signi-
ficance of the idealizing tradition about the earlier golden
age, wherein every man sat under his own vine and fig
tree, will now begin to become apparent. Vines and fig
trees are never planted in the air. They are always rooted
in the soil. And when the ownership of the soil is con-
centrating in fewer and fewer hands, it is plain that fewer
and fewer men can sit under their oAvn vines and fig trees,
and that more and more men will sigh regretfully for the
times of old. The concentration of landed property,
which invariably attends the development of what is popu-
larly called "the'' social problem, w^as evidently going for-
ward in the age that we are now trying to study. Is-
raelite society as a whole was economically so backward
that public opinion made no distinction between treach-
erously seizing an estate, as Ahab did, and foreclosing
(perhaps by violence) a mortgage on landed property. To
138 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the confused, ignorant, and excited public mind of the
time, the Ahab-Naboth case doubtless typified the entire
contemporary process of concentration; and it gave the
prophet a dramatic text in illustration of one of the evils
and hardships that came hand in hand with IsraeFs un-
faithfulness to Yahweh.
It is very probable that the contraction of the upper
class and the increase of its wealth had not yet proceeded
so far as in the times of the literary prophets ; and that
the majority of the upper stratum was as yet composed
of less pretentious landed proprietors and slaveholders of
the rustic type. Only upon this view can we explain the
events that followed the preaching of Elijah. It made no
difference whether or not the prophet were logical accord-
ing to valid standards. In courageously denouncing the
most conspicuous land monopolist in the kingdom for
seizing the property of one of the smaller monopolists,
Elijah seemed to be championing the cause of all those
whose land was encumbered by debt, or threatened, or
seized, by wealthier creditors. He was evidently a potent
factor in converting the majority of the landholding class
to the idea that there was a connection between Israel's
unfaithfulness to Yahweh and the various troubles afflict-
ing the country from within and without.
§ 77. — The results of the movement whereof Elijah's
preaching was an expression did not become clearly vis-
ible until after his death. His work was continued by
his disciple, the prophet Elisha, under whose ministry a
startling revolution occurred in both kingdoms. Ahab
was dead; his son Ahaziah, after occupying his father's
throne for a short time, was also deceased ; and the second
son, Jehoram, had worn the crown of the northern king-
dom for a decade. We reproduce from 2 Kings 9 a pass-
age bearing on the revolution :
"And Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of
the prophets, and said unto him. Gird up thy loins, and
take this vial of oil in thine hand, and go to Eamoth-
gilead. And when thou comest thither, look out there
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 139^
Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat the son of Nimshi, and go in,
and make him arise up from among his brethren, and
carry him to an inner chamber. Then take the vial of
oil, and pour it on his head, and say. Thus saith Yahweh,
I have anointed thee king over Israel. Then open the door,
and flee, and tarry not. So the young man, even the young
man the prophet, went to Eamoth-gilead. And when he
came, behold, the captains of the army were sitting; and
he said, I have an errand to thee, O captain. And Jehu
said. Unto which of all us? And he said. To thee, O
captain. And he arose, and went into the house ; and he
poured the oil on his head, and said unto him. Thus saith
Yahweh, the god of Israel, I have anointed thee king over
the people of Yahweh, even over Israel. And thou shalt
smite the house of Ahab, thy master, that I may avenge
the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of
all the servants of Yahweh, at the hand of Jezebel. For
the whole house of Ahab shall perish ; and I will cut off
from Ahab every man child, and him that is shut up and
him that is left at large in Israel."
This bloody charge was carried out to the letter.
Jehu (or Yahoo) killed Jehoram, king of Israel, and Aha-
ziah, king of Judah, as well as many of the royal princes
of both kingdoms; trod under foot the dead body of
Jezebel, the queen mother; and last but not least, he de-
stroyed all that he could find of the priests and prophets
of the Tyrian god (2 Kings 9 and 10). The revolution of
which Jehu was the champion in the northern kingdom
was matched a few years later by a similar course o^
events in the southern kingdom, whereby the boy king
Jehoash came to the throne, and Mattan, the priest of the
Tyrian god, was killed (2 Kings 11). But for the pres-
ent, Judah may be neglected. The northern kingdom,
while it lasted, embracing as it did by far the larger part
of YahAveh's people, was the principal representative of
the life of Israel.
Thus we behold the first great triumph of the new the-
ology in the official repudiation of the service of foreign
140 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
gods. There was evidently sufficient public opinion to
support this revolution. But large bodies move slowly;
and the local baalim of different cities and villages, hav-
ing been derived from earlier generations, and not being
identified with any general, or national, religious ideas,
were still worshipped. Now that his people had repudi-
ated foreign gods, Yahweh would surely smile upon Is-
rael ! Surely he was not jealous of the little baalim, who
had never aspired to be national gods, and who acknow-
ledged his imperial headship over Israel! These local
deities, together with the various images, poles, teraphim,
high places, and other physical machinery of religion,
were merely subordinate features of the popular faith. We
shall hear more about them later. Reforms always come
slowly; and one drastic change at a time was evidently
all that the sluggish public opinion of Israel, with its
dark, underlying mass of primitive religious ideas, was
capable of supporting.
§ 78. — An incident connected with the revolution
calls here for special notice. In 2 Kings 10 we learn that
when Jehu was in the midst of his bloody work he saw
Jehonadab, the son of Rechab, coming to meet him. "And
Jehu saluted him," continues the account, "and said to
him. Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?
And Jehonadab answered, It is. If it be," continued
Jehu, "give me thine hand. And he gave him his hand;
and Jehu took him up to him into the chariot. And Jehu
said. Come with me, and see my zeal for Yahweh." We
should note that the name "Jehonadab," sometimes given
^^Jonadab," is combined with that of the Israelite god, like
the names of so many persons that figure in this age. It
is more accurately given as "Yahnadab." The questions
here are. Why should Jehu be so glad to have this man
Jehonadab see his "zeal" for Yahweh? And who was Je-
honadab?
The context gives us no hint of an answer. The ab-
sence of all explanation for such a striking incident is
•of itself good presumptive evidence that the writers and
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 141
editors of Kings took it for granted that everybody in
Israel would know who Jehonadab was, and what he rep-
resented. But turning to the book of Jeremiah, written
over two centuries after the age of Jehonadab, we find in
chapter 35 a passage which throws light on this earlier
time:
"The word which came unto Jeremiah from Yahweh,
saying, Go unto the family of the Rechabites, and speak
unto them, and bring them into the house of Yahweh, into
one of the chambers, and give them wine to drink. Then
I took Jaazaniah the son of Jeremiah, the son of Haba-
ziniah, and his brethren, and all his sons, and the whole
family of the Rechabites ; . and I brought them into the
house of Yahweh ; and I set before the sons of the house
of the Rechabites bowls full of wine, and cups, and I said
unto them. Drink ye wine. But they said. We will drink
no wine, for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father com-
manded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye,
nor your sons, for ever ; neither shall ye build house, nor
sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any; but all your
days ye shall dwell in tents ; that ye may live many days
in the land wherein ye sojourn. And we have obeyed the
voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab our father in all that
he charged us, to drink no wine all our days, we, our
wives, our sons, nor our daughters; nor to build houses
for us to dwell in: neither have we vineyard, nor field,
nor seed: but we have dwelt in tents, and have obeyed,
and done according to all that Jonadab our father com-
manded us. But it came to pass, when Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon came up into the land, that we said.
Come, and let us go up to Jerusalem for fear of the army
of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians ;
so we dwell at Jerusalem."
Turning now to a genealogical table in 1 Chronicles
2, we find in verse 55 the following : "These are the Ken-
ites that came of Hammath, the father of the house of
Rechab."
142 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
These passages taken together give us grounds for the
following important conclusions: Jehonadab, or Jona-
dab, was a man of importance, a chief of a "father's
house.'' That is, he was not a man of the lower class, but
of the upper social stratum. This is congruous with the
fact that Jehu, a man aspiring to the kingship, was glad
to associate with him publicly. But more significant than
this, Jehonadab, as 1 Chronicles 2 shows, was a Kenite;
he bore a Yahweh-name; and was known as a champion
of Yahweh. It was from the Kenites, we remember, that
the Israelites apparently derived their national god; and
it is not surprising that the Yahweh tradition and wor-
ship should be strong in families of Kenite descent. The
Kenites of the Sinai region lived the free, open life of
shepherds and tent dwellers. The Israelites, before the
conquest of Canaan, were on precisely the same level of
culture. The Eechabite descendants of Jehonadab, who
came pouring into the city of Jerusalem for fear of hostile
armies, were also primitive country folk, dwelling in
tents, avoiding agriculture, and following doubtless the oc-
cupation of shepherds and cattle breeders. Probably this
family, located on the outskirts of Canaan, had found a
market for their products within the conquered land from
the first. We know that Israel was not entirely agricul-
tural, commercial and industrial, although these activi-
ties became the ruling ones in society. However far civi-
lization has advanced, it has always depended partly upon
the services of people who follow the more primitive
modes of life. Jehonadab, then, seems to have been a chief
of an Israelite-Kenite family of cattle raisers, that lived in
the country districts of Canaanitish Israel. Probably he
was a well-to-do herdsman of the Abraham description.
From these general conclusions we deduce that the
founding of the Rechabite sect was merely the confirming
of the family of Jehonadab in their primitive habits, as
contrasted with the more civilized and settled life which
was now the rule in Israel. The Rechabites, in short, em-
l)odied a protest against the social problem which always
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 143
<?omes with civilization, and which was now pressing upon
Israel and the whole oriental world. The interlacing of
the interests of society is so close and complex that any
change inimical to the main body of Israel could not fail
to react adversely upon the fortunes of country folk —
by limiting the market for their goods, at the very least.
The reason behind the refusal of the Eechabites to drink
wine is obvious. Wine implies agriculture and a settled
mode of life; and in making their protest against civili-
-zation, these tent dwellers and shepherds looked upon
wine as a symbol of the life they more and more abhorred,
from which were issuing the economic influences hurtful
to their welfare. Jehu, the aspirant to the throne, was
glad to have Jehonadab see his "zeaF' for Yahweh because
Jehonadab was a valiant Yahweh man himself, and prom-
inent among the discontented party which supported the
revolution.
It cannot be too many times emphasized that ancient
politics and religion were united; and that in studying
events like these we are examining ordinary, secular
events under the guise of religion.
§ 79. — Another important fact calls for notice in
connection with our survey of the first great age of the new
theology. With a single exception, no king in Israel be-
fore the time of the prophet Elijah had borne a name com-
pounded with that of the god of Israel. Thus, we have
Saul, David, and Solomon over the united kingdom ; and
these bear no Yahweh-names. After the division, we find
Rehoboam, Abijam, and Asa over the southern kingdom;
and Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Omri, and Ahab
over the northern. Among these names we find only one
— Abijam, or Abijah — that might indicate an increasing
public recognition of the claims of Yahweh; and this, by
the way, occurs in Judah, where the Kenites had been
partly absorbed. But in and after the age of Elijah a
very impressive change takes place in this respect. The
heads of both kingdoms, as a rule, now bear names com-
pounded with that of Yahweh. Thus : Ahaziah, or Ahaz-
144 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
yah; Jehosaphat, or Yah-saphat; Jehoram, or Yah-ram^
Joasli, or Yah-ash; Jehu, or Yah-oo; Jotham, or Yah-
tham; Amaziah, or Amaz-yah; Uzziah, or Uz-yah; Zech-
ariah, or Zechar-yah ; Hezekiah, or Hezek-yah ; Pekahiah^
or Peka-yah; Jeconiah, or Jecon-yah; Zedekiah, or Ze-
dek-yah. This very strikingly indicates a growing public^
or formal, recognition of Yahweh, god of the Israelites;,
and is in line with the general movement now under con-
sideration.
§ 80. — Four significant facts, then, distinguish the
period which we have called "the first age of the new the-
ology.''
First : The rise of the new theology itself in the per-
son of Elijah the prophet.
Second: The bloody politico-religious revolutions
in both kingdoms, whereby foreign deities and priests, and
the kings who affiliated with them, were cast out, and Yah-
weh was recognized as the one general god whom Canaan-
itish Israel might legitimately worship.
Third: The founding of the primitive sect of the
Rechabites as a protest against the evils of civilization.
Fourth: The practice of compounding the name of
Yahweh with the names of the monarchs of both king-
doms, which begins in this age.
§ 81. — In studying the decline of Israel, we must
bear constantly in mind the fact that Canaan had been set-
tled and largely civilized long before the Israelite con-
quest. Trade centered in the Canaanite cities. Agricul-
ture and stock raising occupied the Canaanite villagers
and country folk.
We have seen that when the people of Yahweh at-
tacked the land of Canaan, they settled in the agricultural
districts, being unable to subdue the towns. The princi-
pal method by which the Israelite upper class acquired its
country estates was doubtless the extermination, or sub-
jugation of the Canaanite rustic aristocracy. Whether or
not all the arable soil of Canaan had been brought under
cultivation by the time of the Conquest, we do not know.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 145
Perhaps it had not. In any event, whatever the historical
circumstances may have been, the period of the Judges
saw the establishment of an Israelite rustic aristocracy,
superimposed upon a lower class partly of Israelite, and
partly of Canaanite, extraction; and while some of the
estates of this aristocracy may have been carved out of
hitherto uncultivated land, perhaps the majority of them
were the spoil of war.
The settling down of the Israelites to a peaceful life,
and the community of language between them and the
Canaanites, paved the way for the union of the older and
the newer inhabitants. The process of union, as we have
seen, was hastened by the attacks of enemies from out-
side the country. In the long run the Israelite rustic aris-
tocracy and the Canaanite city aristocracy were alike in-
terested in opposing the foreign foe and in maintaining
peace. The diverse population was rallied against its
common enemies, not in the name of any one of the local
Canaanite baalim, but in the name of Yahweh. The new
nation that resulted became Israelite in name, through
its acknowledgment of Yahweh, and partly Israelite in
blood through the continued intermingling of the older
and newer inhabitants. The most formal aspect of this
fusion is to be found in the marriages between the Israel-
ite rustic aristocracy and the Canaanite upper class of the
towns and cities. As previously observed, this operated
to shift the balance of power from the country, where it
lay in the early days of Saul, to the towns and cities,
which it probably reached in the latter days of David, and,
more fully, in the reign of Solomon.
Upon the accession of Kehoboam, the son of Solomon,
the kingdom divided on an economic question whose de-
tails, if we could recover them, would probably show a
foreshadowing of the later troubles. After the division
we enter an age of decline, wherein the social problem of
civilization begins to press for solution — the age that
10
146 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
saw the dramatic rise of the new theology, and culminated
in the bloody politico-religious revolution.
§ 82. — In the decades following the accession of the
bloody Jehu the troubles of Israel continued to develop.
About 100 years after that event (i. e., at about b. c. 740)
we are in the midst of another interesting period in the
history of Israel. The earlier parts of the books of
Amos, Hosea, Micah and Isaiah were written in this
later period. In these books we find that the prob-
lem whose beginnings have been scantily indicated
above has reached the acute stage, and is fast
assuming that chronic form which has been char-
acteristic of oriental countries for many hundreds of
years. In the period at which we have now arrived, in-
deed, the entire oriental world was facing a problem whose
gravity can hardly be overestimated. Failure to solve it
entailed social decay and exposed the earliest great his-
toric civilization to that long series of successful assaults
from without which has issued, for the time being, in the
triumph of Mohammedanism and the Turk. Failure to
solve the same problem at the critical period likewise
brought internal decay upon Greece and Rome, and laid
open their civilization to the attacks of barbarians whom
they would have been able to resist if their social organ-
ism had been more healthy. Modern society also faces
the old problem, albeit under new forms; and failure to
solve it can have no other issue than of old. The ultimate
practical problem of every society is to raise good men —
moral, hopeful, healthy men, with an assured economic
welfare; and if this result is not reached the wheels of
progress are inexorably reversed.
§ 83. — The great evolutionary process that we are ex-
amining begins in the anarchy of animality, and ever
tends to work out the development of a social system, or
collectivism. It does this, however, unconsciously. The
organic and collectivistic nature of society is either not re-
alized, or is but slowly comprehended by men. Social pro-
gress accumulates an ever increasing mass of material and
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 147
spiritual capital, principally through cleavage. The sig-
nificance of the social system at any given moment is due,
not mostly to the individuals who compose the system at
that given moment, but mostly to all that the past has
done for the present. The resources of society are public,
or communal, in their nature. They do not derive their
significance from the individuals composing the society at
the time. Both in respect of its good and of its evil,
society is more properly described as a collectivism than
as an individualism.
But if society is a collectivism, it is, nevertheless, as
observed in the preceding chapter, a collectivism develop-
ing under the forms of individualism. Although the re-
sources of society are public, or communal, in their na-
ture arid origin, they are individual, or private, in their
ownership and control. All the commonplace, working
ideas of men are adjusted primarily upon the individual-
istic basis. Human society is primarily and mostly re-
garded by its members as a mere crowd, or mob. It is
not thought of as a growing organism. This paradoxical
attitude, however, is entirely natural. Human society
develops out of a prior anarchy, and is composed of per-
sons who have grown up from the crude selfishness of in-
fancy, and who live self-centered lives. Looking at the
social process objectively, through the lenses of science,
its organic and coUectivistic nature and tendencies are
plainly visible; but looking at it subjectively, from the
standpoint of the actors in the process, the whole scene
is changed ; and herein is the paradox. To the individual,
the world is a vast open space occupied by himself and
other individuals. He is one of a crowd, or mob, of peo-
ple who are engaged in various pursuits. His first ten-
dency is to take things as he finds them. In order that
men shall exist in society, and engage in their various pur-
suits, it is necessary to have a common standpoint from
which to think and talk about affairs. This common
standpoint, which everybody primarily assumes, is the in-
dividualistic standpoint. The common ground upon
148 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
which men primarily meet in society is the ground of
individualism.
Applying these considerations to the subject of cleav-
age, the first thing to be observed is, that the social, or
public, mind has been hitherto unconscious of cleavage as
here expounded. Public opinion has never yet reckoned
with it in the sense that we are here trying to reckon with
it. The nearest that the common consciousness comes to
it is when verging upon "the relations between the rich
and the poor.'' There has been more or less vague talk
about "the grinding of the faces of the poor," and of "the
conspiracy of the rich against the poor;" and there has
been a small section of class-conscious persons on both
sides of the line of cleavage. But the vast subject of
class relations has never been formulated as it deserves,
either in public or private thought. There has always,
been a strong tendency on the part of all classes to assume
that all men have had an equal start; that a man's posi-
tion in life depends more upon his personal exertions than
upon forces over which the individual has no control;
that a man is to be judged by the clothes that he wears,
and by the amount of property at his disposal; that a
poor man is not to be honored ; and that a rich man is to
be given great personal credit. It is, of course, the de-
sire of practically everybody to be able to control a large
amount of wealth. Life is thought of under the figure of
"a race for wealth." The goal is wealth; and all are in
the race. According to the figure, it follows that the suc-
cessful ones in the race must have been able to run more
swiftly than the unsuccessful ones. Those that are
wealthy are given individual honor, not only by each
other, but by the vast mass of the unsuccessful who have
never attained the goal. Wealth is practically identified
with merit ; and if a man is not wealthy, let him say noth-
ing, and serve those who are wealthy, that perchance he
may get some of the crumbs that fall from the rich man's
table. And all this accords with the popular individual-
istic philosophy, which is at most only half true.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 149
It is necessary to hold these considerations firmly in
mind when studying the problem toward which our sur-
vey is advancing, for they reveal the terms of the profound
paradox concealed in the very heart of society, to miss
which is ultimate social ruin.
§ 84. — We have learned that while society is in the
nomadic stage of development, cleavage rests upon slav-
ery. When society settles down permanently upon the soil,
however, the earlier form of cleavage is associated with,
and at length displaced by, a later form of it. The free,
upper class claims individual property in the soil, and
becomes a landed class. At first the beneficence of this
arrangement manifestly exceeds the evils that flow from
it. While population is scanty, and while unclaimed land
is available, social progress goes forward without serious
check. But at length social cleavage as based on private
land monopoly begins to develop more evil than good.
Along with the growth of population the demand for
land becomes greater. This causes land to rise in value.
As capital accumulates, increasing the sum of industrial
facilities, it becomes more and more profitable to engage
in enterprises of all kinds in city and country; and this,
too, forces up the value of land. It is realized that land
is the foundation of all things; and at length all the
available soil, used and unused, comes into the grasp of
private rights.
Thus the progress of every settled society leads to the
enclosing of more and more land, not only for immediate
use, but also for speculation. All the land within a coun-
try becomes the absolute monopoly of a class. There is
no escape from this proposition. The entire body of land-
owners obviously composes a monopolistic upper class as
against all persons living or to be born. The members of
this class may, indeed, give or sell some or all of their mo^
nopoly privileges to other persons. But the transfer of a
monopoly by gift, sale, or bequest, does not change its
nature. The monopolists may come and go; but the mo-
nopoly itself remains. And it is land monopoly that grad-
150 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ually replaces human slavery as the determining factor in
social cleavage. The ancient civilizations, however, did
not abolish the institution of property in men, leaving
that for modern society to do.
§ 85. — The tendency of land monopoly, when it i»
completely established, is toward the depression of the
lower class to the lowest point at which that class can
exist from day to day on a hand-to-mouth basis, and to
raise the upper class into correspondingly greater afflu-
ence. The upper class holds the key to the source of all
supply. The lower class, having only its labor power to
depend upon, must apply to the masters of the economic
situation for opportunities 'to exert that labor power. The
slave, as a rule, is permitted to reserve out of his labor
products enough to support life in fair comfort. The slave
is his master's property; and, providing the supply of
slaves be not excessive and their price low, it is plainly the
interest of slaveowners to keep their human property in
good physical condition. But if slavery be abolished while
the upper class monopolize the land, or if there be a per-
sonally free element in the lower class, the so-called "free''
laborer must, as a rule, be content with a wage represent-
ing, in the long run, about enough to support himself and
family on a hand-to-mouth basis. The increase of popu-
lation, constantly throwing new "hands" into the labor
world in search of work, tends to hold wages at the hand-
to-mouth level, or to depress them to that level if, for any
reason, they have been above it. If the free laborer de-
mand a higher wage than he has been receiving, other
men stand ready to work for the price he has been getting.
Though the lower class be free in name and in form,
nevertheless it has no resources beyond its labor power;
and its members must compete with each other for em-
ployment in the service of those who own the natural
source of all supply.
Thus extreme wealth and extreme poverty appear to-
gether, the cause of the one being also the cause of the
other. The vast increase of wealth in the hands of the
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 151
upper class results in the diversion of appropriated labor
products from capital to luxury, while the vast increase
of dependence in the lower class generates all the evils
that accompany poverty. The lower class grows hope-
less. Kobbery and crimes against the person increase..
Beggary grows apace. Poor girls and women, lacking the
necessities produced by the labor of their own class, sell
themselves to men who have grown wealthy on lower-
class labor, and who have more than they can use pro-
perly.
§ ^%. — This problem is complicated, but not essen-
tially altered, by the fact of monopoly concentration, al-
ready referred to when discussing the preaching of Eli-
jah, the Ahab-Naboth incident, and the vine-and-fig-tree
tradition. It is now time to look at this important fact
more closely.
If a country be newly settled by foreigners, as Amer-
ica was after its discovery by Columbus, or if a countr;^
be subjugated, as Canaan was by the Israelites, there are
at first opportunities not only for the formation of large
landed estates, but of small ones as well. When America
was first settled by Europeans, not only did wealthy per-
sons from the nobility and the commercial upper class in
the old countries take up large tracts of land, but the
immense empire of good, unused soil provided homes for
many free men of little or no wealth. All the good soil
of America has at length come into the grasp of private
rights. To some extent, of course, it has been taken up
for actual, immediate use; but more for speculation than
for use. The vast empire of land over which today flies
the flag of the United States contains natural resources
great enough to support several times its present popula-
tion; but these natural resources are monopolized —
"held for a rise;" and the pressure of increasing popula-
tion is forcing Congress to apply the superficial remedy
of irrigating the arid lands of the west for the benefit of
the homeseekers. When the Israelite tribes left the bar-
baric, wandering life of the desert, and conquered part of
152 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the land of Canaan, there were opportunities not only for
the leaders and larger slaveowners to take up large landed
estates, but there were also homestead openings for humb-
ler freemen. These men were the relatives of the clan
leaders. They were men who had few slaves or none. If
these humbler freemen possessed a few slaves, they
figured as a small aristocracy. If they had none, depend-
ing upon themselves and perhaps their sons, or upon hired
labor, they figured as a peasant proprietai:y. In any case,
whether the smaller freemen had slaves or not, we should
know that the settlement of Canaan by the Israelites,
like the settlement of America by Europeans, provided at
the start for the admission of poor as well as rich to the
monopoly of the land.
Coming now to the present point, we observe that in
any social system wherein private property in the soil
exists, the lesser landholders, even if they form at first
an actual majority of the free class, tend to be depressed
by economic forces into the lower dependent class. This
contraction of the landowning class, whereby the many
small estates are added to the larger holdings, complicates
the social problem, but does not change its essential na-
ture as generally set forth above. Concentration went
forward in Israel and oriental society in general, just as
it is going forward in America today. It is impossible
to indicate the point in time at which the effects of
upper-class contraction began to be visible. We run no
risk, however, in concluding that its beginnings were
noticeable at the time of the division of the kingdom;
and that in the age of Elijali it had become serious.
With reference to the still later period whereon our at-
tention is now gradually focussing, Professor Paton
writes : "While the nobles flourished the poor grew stead-
ily poorer. The peasant proprietors were crowded out,
and all the land came into the hands of a few great nobles.
The free-born Israelites sank to the position of serfs. Op-
pression and injustice flourished" (54).
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 153
§ 87. — The forces working toward the concentration
of landed estates in Canaanitish Israel were manj. A
suggestion from a late period, but valid as an illustration
at any time, is found in the fifth chapter of Nehemiah:
"Some also there were that said. We are mortgaging
our fields and our vineyards and our houses: Let us get
corn because of the dearth. There were also that said,
We have borrowed money for the king's tribute upon our
fields and our vineyards. Yet now our flesh is as the
flesh of our brethren, our children as their children : and,
lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to
be slaves, and some of our daughters are brought into
bondage already; neither is it in our power to help it;
for other men have our fields and our vineyards."
Eeference to the "king's tribute" in the passage re-
produced above leads to a subject of great importance in
relation to the concentration of land monopoly. Taxes
were poorly adjusted in ancient oriental society, as they
were in ancient Greece and Kome, and as they are in
modern society. Taxation relates to the payments by
members of a social group in support of common policies
necessary to the life and welfare of the group. The in
stitution, or agency, which carries out these common
policies we call "government;" and the concerns and
forms of government we call "politics." Thus "politics"
is merely an abstract term standing for one side, or phase,
of the complex life of human society.
In the earlier sections of this chapter we have tried
to show that government, like many other institutions,
necessarily organizes itself upon the lines of cleavage at
a very early period. As soon as social bodies of any size
have been formed, government rests naturally with the
freemen, not with the slaves; and out of the totality of
freemen, the wealthier ones acquire control of the govern-
ment. The great type of the ancient politician is Abra-
ham, whether lie be taken as an actual person or not.
Such. a man, however, is merely "the first among peers."
The other freemen of the tribe, relatives of Abraham by
154 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
blood or adoption, consult with him in regard to the
proper courses to be followed in common for the benefit
of the whole group.
In a primitive society of this kind, it is difficult to
say where the subject of taxation begins or ends. Taxa-
tion, like everything else, is under the law of evolution.
It passes from the indefinite to the definite; and no hu-
man science can trace the details of its history. The most
that can be done is to indicate the bolder tendencies and
outlines. Let us suppose that such a tribe, having camped
for a time upon a certain territory, finds its food supply
growing short, and proposes to acquire the pasture lands
and hunting grounds of some other tribe. After the gov-
erning council has decided what to do, the tribal chief
summons the freemen to the common enterprise. Each
freeman is naturally assessed for the expenses of the
campaign in proportion to the amount of his slaves, cat-
tle and other property. Each freeman thinks of himself
and his brother freemen as "paying" slaves, cattle, and
goods toward tjie expenses of the campaign; and, what
is more, since public opinion is primarily formed by the
upper class of legal men, the same view is taken by the
lower class also. Likewise, people who in modern times
are actually bearing the largest share of the burdens of
government, regard themselves, and are thought of by
others, as non-taxpayers; while a relatively small class
of men who formally and legally hand in the taxes to the
government officials are thought of by all as the only real
"payers.'' But the real payers, alike in modern society
and in the nomadic tribe, are not necessarily identical
with the legal payers; and the superficial view com-
monly taken breeds trouble in the discussion of the later
problems of governmental support.
When tribes left the nomadic life, and settled per-
manently on the soil, they naturally carried over with
them the principle of taxation according to ability to pay.
This is the method which first and most naturally occurs
to us when discussing the subject of governmental sup-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 156>
port; and, on the whole, if correctly and consistently ap-
plied, it is the best rule of taxation.
But before it can be carried to its logical application
in settled society, and while it is applied only in its earlier
and cruder form, this principle works irresistibly toward
the concentration of landed estates and of general wealth.
The mass of city property, real and personal, movable
and fixed, is inevitably under-assessed as compared with
taxable values in the rural districts; and the further the
progress of civilization advances, with its ever growing
preponderance of city life over country life, the further
does the relative over-assessment of rustic property go.
In the agricultural and stock-raising districts the as-
sessor can estimate very closely the value of all property.
The items of rustic property are matters of common gos-
sip; and the farmer himself, when questioned by the
assessor, cannot much understate the values in his posses-
sion without risk of detection. On the other hand, the ap-
praiser cannot accurately estimate the total values of the
different kinds and amounts of real and personal property
in the cities. A large part of city wealth consists of trade
stocks in a state of constant flux; much city wealth can
be effectually hidden from the tax collector; and often
the owners of city property cannot themselves accurately
estimate the values in their possession, or that have
passed through their hands in the course of a year. The
larger the cities grow, and the wealthier they become, the
more difficult is it to reach their property by the crude ap-
plication of the ability-to-pay principle. Thus, in all set-
tled societies there is an over-assessment of rural pro-
perty, and an underassessment of city property; while
the smaller property holders everywhere, in city and coun-
try alike, pay more in proportion than do the larger
holders.
In Canaanitish Israel the burdens of the frequent
and often protracted wars obviously fell more heavily
in proportion upon the small than upon the large pro-
prietors. The estates of the smaller landowners were
156 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
necessarily more neglected during a war than the better
served and more organized estates of the larger propri-
etors and slaveowners; while the town aristocracy suf-
fered least of all. We must bear prominently in mind in
this connection that the Canaanite upper class of the
towns and cities held its own at the time of the Conquest ;
and that these busy centers of population were wealthy
before the appearance of the tribes of Israel. As soon as
the Israelites had established themselves in the agricul-
tural districts, and united politically with the Canaanite
towns to form the nation of Canaanitish Israel, the condi-
tions here being set forth began to prevail. After a war
the small aristocrats and the peasant proprietors would
find their estates in decay. In order to re-stock their
farms and pay their taxes, they would be forced to bor-
row from underassessed and richer men in country and
city, as we saw the farmers doing in the passage quoted
from Nehemiah. Thereafter, the small aristocrats would
have to make their property yield not only all their living
expenses and taxes, but interest on the loan, and finally
the repayment of the loan itself. In time, they or their
heirs, working at a continuous and increasing disadvan-
tage, would fall under these burdens; and the richer
neighbor, or the money lender from the city, would claim
the property. As the passage in Nehemiah also suggests,
drouth and failure of crops, like war, would force the
small owner to borrow from the wealthier, and with a like
result.
In the light of these universal tendencies, is it strange
'that the question over which Canaanitish Israel was di-
vided at the end of its first and only century of national
existence was a question of taxation? David was repro-
Tjated by later tradition for taking a census of Israel,
whereof an object, among others, was probably to ascer-
tain the amount of taxable property in the whole country.
'Solomon, his son, divided the land into taxation districts
regardless of tribal affiliations. At the death of Solomon,
who was a city man in contrast with Saul, the first king,
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 157-
the balance of economic power in the mixed population
had probably shifted from country to city ; and the writ-
ings of the literary prophets exhibit the increasing eco-
nomic domination of the rural districts by the city pluto-
crats. Is it strange that there has always been more or
less feeling between the rural and the urban sections of
society? And is it strange that a formal protest was made
by Jehonadab and the Kechabites on behalf of the original
primitive life, against the evils that were somehow con-
nected with progress and civilization, commerce and
cities?
§ 88. — Thus we note the conditions operating to re-
duce the comparative size and increase the economic re-
sources of the upper class, while, on the contrary, increas-
ing the comparative size and cutting down the economic
resources of the lower class.
Undoubtedly, as we have already explained, the lower
class has derived untold benefits through the advance of
each great civilization which has been thus far projected
above the levels of barbarism, savagery, and animality.
It must be frankly acknowledged, however, that this par-
ticipation in progress has not been the result of any so-
cial intelligence. By the operation of cosmic forces, and
without knowledge of what is working out in their lives,
primitive men are carried up from savagery and animal-
ity into civilization. But the further the process of social
development goes, the more necessary does it become that
men awaken to a realization of the nature and laws of
society. They must acquire knowledge enough to perceive
what public measures to take, and public spirit enough
to take those measures. The civilization that fails in this
respect inevitably goes backward; and the lower class,
as we are learning, is the first to suffer.
In the period at which Ave have arrived, oriental civi-
lization had reached its great social crisis, and, ignorant
of the facts and laws of its own social being, was going
down to ruin. Here was a vast world of humanity whose
culture lies at the base of much of the higher progress;
158 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
of later historic civilizations. Here was a social world
which had accomplished more, both materially and intel-
lectually, than any other section of the human race up
to that time. Yet, just at the period when we seem to
have the right to expect oriental society to achieve a still
greater destiny, it falls into internal decay, and succumbs
to the attacks of barbarians that close in upon it from all
sides.
§ 89. — When the oriental world attempted to explain
the situation in which it found itself in its age of decline,
the social intelligence of the period, as just observed, was
unequal to the task. Out of all that great civilization —
out of all that weltering sea of humanity — the only voice
that has reached us across the vista of the centuries is
the voice of the prophets of Israel, proclaiming the doc-
trines of the new theology. It would be illogical, how-
ever, to suppose that Israel was the only people among
whom expressions of dissatisfaction found voice, for, in
the very nature of the case, dissatisfaction must have been
universal. But Israel was the only people whose early
history supplied a basis, either in fact or in tradition,
for a dramatic interpretation of the social problem. The
prophets were moved by no merely local tendency. They
represented a local involution of a universal tendency.
We have seen that Elijah, in the ninth century b. c,
was the first great representative of the new theology.
But probably the new view did not reach complete ex-
pression until tradition had had more time to work. In
the eighth century b. o. it became at length fully articu-
late in such preachers as Amos, Hosea, Micah, and Isaiah.
To the sociologist who investigates the writings of these
and later prophets from the broad, scientific standpoint,
it is plain that their concern was primarily social, and
secondarily theological. They were dealing with what,
in modern times and modern terms, is commonly called
"the" social problem. Their preaching, although neces-
sarily theological in form (politics and religion being
united), was in substance an attempt to explain and solve
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 159
practical, secular difficulties which the world has now
learned, or is fast learning, to approach in a wholly differ-
ent spirit. In this respect, indeed, the new theology was
directly in line with what has been shown to be the prac-
tical motive of all early religion. In other words, the new
Israelite theology, however strange it may have seemed in
contrast with primitive theology in general, was a new
species of an old genus.
§ 90. — According to the most general form of the
prophetic doctrine, the troubles that had come upon Is-
rael in Canaan, both from outside and inside the country,
were primarily due to the fact that Israel had not been
faithful to the contract with Yahweh at Mount Sinai. At
the beginning of the national history, Yahweh had
wrought great wonders for his chosen people, and given
Israel a glorious and rising place in the world. He was
obviously the maker of Israel. But Israel had perversely
^^forgotten his maker,'' and "gone a-whoring after other
gods, and after the baalim of the Canaanites whom Yah-
weh drave out before the face of Israel." If Israel would
not be faithful to Yahweh in return for all his faithful-
ness, what wonder was it that Yahweh should turn, and
"^^hide his face,'' and bring trouble upon his chosen people?
Let Israel cast away the baalim, and serve Yahweh as
faithfully as he had served his chosen people; then the
tide of prosperity would return; and the course of em-
pire, interrupted by the sins of the people, would once
more take its way until Israel should inherit the world.
The revolution of Jehu in the northern kingdom, and
of Jehoash in the southern, had, indeed, banished the gods
of other nations; but the baalim of the Canaanites, "the
former inhabitants of the land," remained. Yahweh him-
self, having conquered Canaan, was called the great Baal,
or proprietor, of the land of Israel. His worship was
conducted at the "high places" all over the country in
connection with the service of the local baalim ; and when
the same term, "baal," or "proprietor," was thus applied
at once to Yahweh and the local gods, it became plain to
160 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
zealous worshippers of the general god of Israel that this^
practice was likely to make the people confuse Yahweh
with the lesser gods. Listen to the prophet Hosea, in
a passage which exhibits the tendency of the people ta
apply to Yahweh the same title as that which they be-
stowed upon the lesser gods, and also shows the persist-
ence of the worship of these local deities :
"And it shall be at that day, saith Yahweh, that thou
shalt call me Ishi, [my husband], and shalt call me no
more Baali [my proprietor]. For I will take away the
names of the baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no
more be remembered by their name^' (Hosea 2: 16, 17).
It is plain that the prophets did not understand the
inner circumstances of the conquest and settlement of
Canaan by Israel. Elijah and his successors lived in
times when the glory of united Israel was a thing of the
past. They could not see, as we today can, that the con-
quest was a much smaller and more sordid affair than it
seemed in the eyes of the later generations among whom
they lived. They could not understand that the estab-
lishment of Israel as a national power was largely due
to the incorporation of the Canaanites themselves. Nor
did they perceive that the history of Israel in Canaan was
really a continuation of the earlier history of the country
under a new name.
The prophets, however, were not critical historians.
There were no critical historians in that age; and, more-
over, the object of the prophets was not historical. They
were intensely preoccupied with the practical difficulties
of their own times. They accepted the popular tradition
of Yahw^eh and Israel at its face value; but they got more
out of the tradition than did the less thoughtful among
the people.
§ 91. — Physical faithfulness to the worship of Yah-
weh as contrasted with other gods was not, however, all
that the prophets demanded. To the prophetic mind,
faithfulness to Yahweh meant a great deal more than
mere mechanical devotion to his worship. Israel had not
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 161
only mixed the worship of Yahweh with the service of
other gods, and thereby committed grievous error; but
the people had been "unrighteous" and "unjust'' in their
dealings with each other. It was clear to the prophets
that the people could not render the fullest and most effi-
cient service to Yahweh when they were unrighteous to
each other. Justice and righteousness were a part of the
service of Yahweh; and if the people were unrighteous^
this was proof positive that they did not "know Yahweh.'^
If the people did not know Yahweh, even while faithful
to his worship in a ritual, or mechanical, sense, they
were offending him as much as by the worship of other
gods. "I hate, I despise your feasts,'' are the words that
the prophet Amos utters for Yahweh. "I will take no de-
light in your solemn assemblies. Yea, though ye offer
me your burnt offerings and meat offerings, I will not ac-
cept them: neither will I regard the peace offerings of
your fat beasts. Take thou away from me the noise of thy
songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But
let judgment roll down as waters, and righteousness as
an overflowing stream" (Amos 5 : 21 f.). It is plain, from
the works of the literary prophets themselves, that all the
people regarded and worshipped Yahweh as the great god
of Israel. There is no doubt of this. But the people
had mixed his worship with that of other deities ; thereby
showing unfaithfulness to a powerful god who had chosen
them out of all the families of the earth, and shown a
singular faithfulness to their interests. Although they
held many feasts and solemn assemblies in his honor;
although they made many burnt offerings, and meat offer-
ings, and sacrifices of fat beasts; although they rendered
songs, and played on musical instruments before him,
— yet there was injustice in their every-day life. Unless
judgment "ran down as waters," and righteousness as
"an overflowing stream," all this mechanical worship
counted for nothing. Yahweh hated it; and would not
accept it.
11
162 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
§ 92. — There was nothing essentially new in this
prophetic association of ethics and religion; but the cir-
cumstances made it seem new. To begin to understand
the circumstances, we must once more consider the transi-
tion stage in social development wherein wandering tribes
unite in settled nations.
In the nomadic social group, a certain species of
justice between the tribesmen is plainly a condition of
their corporate unity and strength. If the clan brothers
are unjust to each other they destroy the unity of the
group, and expose it to the attacks of outsiders. This
primitive, tribal morality is the legislation of immemorial
custom, whereof the tribal and the clan chiefs are the
executives. And since the gods are translated chiefs and
heroes, they too represent the demand for morality. All
personal conduct which is thought necessary to the com-
mon welfare is, then, demanded by the gods; and in the
name of the gods the tribal chief renders judgment be-
tween man and man. When the Israelitish tribes ac-
quired their god Yahweh in the wilderness, there was
naturally associated with him a conventional, primitive
morality. The considerations here adduced are the induc-
tive grounds for supposing that Moses gave the people a
rough code of ethics at Sinai. If the literature of Israel
affords deductive grounds for the same conclusion (as
we think it does ) so much the better for the argument.
But when tribes hitherto nomadic settle permanently
upon the soil, and unite into a nation, it is not long be-
fore the national organization overshadows and super-
sedes the earlier tribal system. The altered social condi-
tion of the people makes it not only unnecessary but im-
possible to continue the tribal organization and life. At
length, all that remains of the more ancient system is
family political supremacy and family social tradition.
Tribes, indeed, may be said to evaporate in sentiment
when nations crystallize in politics. This profound social
transformation cannot fail to affect the ethical relations
obtaining between men; and in the case of Canaanitish
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 163
Israel, the dramatic rise of the new theology in the per-
sons of Elijah and his successors, the writing prophets,
indicates that along with the dissolution of tribal bonds
the Mosaic, or tribal, ethicalism had broken down.
The prophets based their ethicalism upon the Mosaic
tradition; but, practically, their demand for righteous-
ness is to be traced back directly into the primitive reli-
gious consciousness of rustic Israelites like the family of
Jehonadab, and to the example of nomadic tribes that
always hovered on the outskirts of the land in limited
contact with the main body of Israelite society in Canaan.
It is indeed of great importance to notice and empha-
size that the earlier preachers of the new theology came,
not from the cities, but from the rural districts, which
were bearing the heavier proportional burdens of taxa-
tion, and falling under the economic sway of the cities.
The cities were wealthy before the Conquest; and it was
to the cities that the titles to the property of the mixed
population steadily gravitated after the rise of the na-
tional kingdom of Canaanitish Israel. It was against all
tendency to city life, we are again and again reminded,
that the zealous Jehonadab and the Kenite Kechabites pro-
tested in the first great age of the new theology. The affi-
nity of prophetism with this feeling is exhibited in words
that Hosea, one of the earlier literary prophets, puts in the
mouth of Yahweh: "I will yet again make thee to dwell
in tents" (Hosea 12:9). This declaration is the anti-
thesis of a reproachful reference to the wealth of the city
people as follows: "As for the canaanite [i. e., the
trader], the balances of deceit are in his hand. He loveth
to defraud. And Ephraim [i. e., northern Israel] said,
Surely I am become rich. I have found me wealth"
(Hosea 12:7, 8). In this passage the term "canaanite"
does not indicate the descendants of the earlier inhabit-
ants of the land, as such. It is applied to Israelites of
the cities as a term synonymous with "trader," "traf-
ficker," or "merchant." It was the cities of Canaan, we
remember, that the Israelitish tribes could not conquer;
164 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
and the later, commercial signification of the term
"canaanite'' is reminiscent of this fact. The new the-
ology, then, took its rise in the rural districts. The home
of the great Elijah seems to have been in the Gilead
region, in the hills east of the River Jordan, bordering
on the Arabian desert, where Israelite society naturally
retained longest the rustic simplicity of earlier days, and
where it came into contact with nomadic folk (1 Kings
17 : 1).* Elijah's disciple and continuator, Elisha ben Sha-
phat, was called by him from the plow handles (1 Kings
19 : 19 f.). According to the text, Elisha was plowing
with twelve yoke of oxen before him, and he himself with
the twelfth. Leaving his work he asked permission of
Elijah to kiss his father and mother. Evidently we get
a glimpse here of one of the rustic landed families of Is-
rael. Likewise, Amos, probably the first of the writing
prophets, was a herdman of Tekoa and a dresser of syco-
more trees (Amos 1:1; 7:14, 15). Hosea was probably
more familiar with rural than with urban life; and the
quotations just made from his book reveal his prejudice
against the city. Micah appears to have been connected
with a country village located in the Shephelah, where, as
Professor G. A. Smith remarks, "there are none of the con-
ditions or of the occasions of a large town'' (55); and
Micah's book is especially concerned with the peasantry
of the agricultural districts. Thus we see that for about
the first hundred and fifty years of its existence — i. e.,
from Elijah to Micah — the new theology was rustic, and
not urban, in its main connections. It was formulated in
the country.
But in the last half of the eighth century b. c, pro-
phetism, tardily following the line of the kingship, was
drawn into the centripetal movement of population and
* Plausible grounds have been advanced for the view that the great
center of the new theology was in the Jerameelite Negeb ; but this does
not affect our point, for the Negeb was one of the most primitive outlying
sections of Israel.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 166
power. Isaiah, the great contemporary of Micah, carried
the message of the new theology into the city of Jerusa-
lem ; and from Isaiah onward prophetism appears in con-
nection with city life.
§ 93. — One who rightly studies the works of the pro-
phets in connection with the other literature of Israel,
and in the light of universal history, cannot fail to see
that the prophets are unconsciously dealing, in large
part, with problems involved in cleavage.
The basis of cleavage in the times of the prophets was
in great part shifted from slavery to land monopoly, al-
though the institution of slavery survived in vigor from
an earlier time. There was a vast lower class. Above
this was outspread a smaller upper class which owned a
part of the lower class and all of the soil under its feet.
The upper stratum — of mixed blood, and calling itself
^^Israel," par excellence — was, and had been for several
generations, contracting upon itself by the. operation of
the powerful economic forces that we have described.
The small aristocrats and the peasant land monopolists
were being depressed into the lower, unpropertied social
stratum.
The prophets, representing primarily the rural aris-
tocracy, were greatly scandalized by the concentration of
property. They held it to be immoral for a large land-
owner to take the estate of some smaller monopolist who
was indebted to him, but could not discharge his obliga-
tions. Interest on loans (rendered "usury") was also for-
bidden as unbrotherly and wrong. These ideas are strange
to one who has been reared in a modern, commercial so-
ciety ; but in the times that we are studying they expressed
the ignorant reaction of the country against the city, of
tribalism against commercialism. In the eyes of the more
primitive and less fortunate Israelites, it was just
as wrong for a wealthy landowner to foreclose a mortgage
upon his less wealthy brother of the tribes of Israel as
it was for a man to take by force the land of one who owed
him nothing. These two kinds of cases, unlike in es-
166 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
sence, are the same in outward form; and hence they
were thrown into one class by the more primitive sections
of Israelite society. In the light of these considerations,
already alluded to in an earlier connection, we begin to
see more clearly how it was that Elijah could make an
impressive point in denouncing Ahab for seizing the land
of Naboth. It is evident that Ahab had no mortgage
against Naboth ; and that the procedure was indefensible
(to say nothing of the murder); but the economic sense of
the rural aristocracy made no fine distinctions. The
Ahab-Naboth case, in one of its prominent aspects, repre-
sented the forcible seizure of the land of a small monopo-
list by one of the larger monopolists; and was not this
just what was becoming all too common in Israel? The
protests of the eighth-century prophets indicate that con-
centration was not abated in their times. "Woe to them
that devise iniquity!" exclaims the prophet Micah. "They
covet fields, and seize them, and houses, and take them
away : and they oppress a man and his family, even a man
and his heritage" (Micah 2:1, 2). The prophet Isaiah
takes up the same strain: "Woe unto them that join
house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no
room, and ye be made to dwell alone in the midst of the
land!" (Isaiah 5:8). The concentration of property, and
the contraction of the upper class went steadily forward
in Israel and in the oriental world at large, just as it has
in Greece, Rome, western Europe, and modern America.
The wealthier Israelites, in order to protect what, under
the existing system, were their legitimate rights, were
perhaps often compelled to resort to force and cunning
when foreclosing. The only difference between ancient
and modern forms of the process is, that in ancient times
it was accomplished rudely, while in modern times both
creditors and debtors have learned to be more polite.
According to the prophets, then, the action of a
wealthier Israelite in ejecting his poorer brethren was a
sin on the part of the individual; and such sins were
among the causes of the bad condition of Israel. In com-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 167
menting on the doctrine of the prophets, Dr. Kirkpatrick
says : "No doubt there were not a few among the wealthy
nobles of Micah's day who prided themselves on not being
guilty of injustice. Yes! Perhaps they were entirely
within their legal rights when they seized the land of
some poor neighbor who through bad seasons and mis-
fortune and pressure of heavy taxes had failed to pay his
debts and fallen into their power. But was conduct like
that brotherly?" (56). Evidently, the modern commenta-
tor endorses the doctrine of the prophets.
§ 94. — In sharp contrast with the claims of the pro-
phets, not only on this point, but on others, a scientific
treatment of the subject must, we think, hold, not that
the condition of Israel was the result of bad individual
conduct, but that bad personal conduct was the result
of the condition of Israel. Contraction of the upper class
is a natural incident of private land monopoly. Private
ownership of the earth, as we have seen over and over
again, is the second great historical basis of cleavage,
human slavery being the first; and the prophets never
had anything to say against either of these foundations of
cleavage. It is true that the prophet Jeremiah (chapter
34) demands, in the name of Yahweh, the liberation of
certain specified slaves; but these individuals were free-
born persons, of Israelite parentage. "Every man should
let his manservant, and every man his maidservant, be-
ing an Hebrew or an Hebrewess, go free; that none
should serve himself of them, of a Jew his brother." This
proclaims no universal, or social, emancipation ; and it is
only an echo of the exclusive "brotherliness" of primitive
tribalism. The real attitude of the prophets, which in
this respect was like that of their contemporaries, is rep-
resented by the passage already quoted from Leviticus 25.
This passage, it will be recalled, forbids the reduction of
free-born Israelite brethren to slavery, but commands the
purchase of bondmen forever from foreigners and from
strangers that sojourn among the people. The settlement
of a country, as we have already observed, gives oppor-
168 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
tunities for the formation of both large and small estates.
But the small estates, equally with the large ones, repre-
sent the principle of monopoly; and the smaller propri-
etors must accept the consequences of the institution on
which their property is based. But in ancient Israel the
smaller monopolists made a great outcry. They de-
manded, first of all, that they be permitted to borrow
from the wealth of their brethren, the larger monopolists,
without paying interest. (This wealth, we must re-
member, consisted principally of the appropriated labor
products of the lower class). Then, when they were un-
able to repay their loans, they protested against the seiz-
ure of their estates. In brief, they wanted to be taken by
the loan route more fully into the fortunate upper class
of "brethren" who fattened on special privileges.
Of course, . foreclosure was a very painful procedure.
But, upon the basis of the social institution of private
earth monopoly, there was nothing wrong in the adding
of house to house and field to field. If the less fortunate
monopolists had not grace enough to take the standpoint
of their more fortunate brethren, and give up their es-
tates to their creditors, it was natural that their credi-
tors should eject them by force, with little ceremony, and
often with brutality. It is true that the creditors might
have been more polite about it, and that in the rudeness of
the foreclosures there was opportunity for the improve-
ment of individual conduct. But when we have narrowed
the question down to the basis of politeness we have
passed the point where we can ask, with Dr. Kirkpatrick,
whether it was brotherly.
§ 95. — We have already fully recognized that the
demand of the prophets for personal righteousness was
broader than the limits of this particular question; and
we have indeed criticised this aspect of their preaching
merely by way of introduction to a more general view of
their claims.
From beginning to end, the prophetic doctrine of in-
dividual righteousness as a remedy for existing social
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 169
conditions was cast on the same lines. The prophets de-
clared, in effect, that the troubles, of Israel were due, first,
to unfaithfulness to Yahweh, and, second, to personal
unrighteousness; and while they never ceased to demand
ritual faithfulness to the covenant god of Israel, they
more and more assimilated personal righteousness to his
worship. Viewing society from the standpoint of indi-
vidualism, they said, in effect: "Let every citizen firmly
resolve to become a better citizen and a better man ; and
then, when every man is good, the world will be right."
Into this claim their prescription resolves in final
analysis; and we shall consider the prophets for a space
in their character as individualistic moralists.
§ 96. — We cannot better illustrate the main point
that we are trying to make in connection with the pro-
phets in this character than by recurring- to an earlier
stage of our survey. When studying the struggle for ex-
istence which prevails among animals and men in the
state of nature, we saw that the fighting and slaughter
and hatred and evil passions of primeval times grew di
rectly out of the relative limitation of the food supply.
The resources of the world were sufficient for all men, if
men had possessed the knowledge, the tools, the social or-
ganization, and cooperative training and habits of thought
necessary to the development of those resources. But in
the state of nature all these necessary things are lacking.
Hence the struggle for existence among prehistoric men
and among v/ild animals. Evil conduct is not the cause
of their troubles. On the contrary, their troubles are the
cause of their evil conduct. Their conduct, in last analy-
sis, rests on a cosmic basis, and not on the ground of in-
dividual ill will. It would have been fatuous for a pre-
historic prophet to preach the virtues of good will, and to
urge every savage to cleanse his heart from all evil feel-
ings, and to resolve to become a better citizen and a better
man. Conditions are so simple in primeval times, and
the distance from cause to effect is so direct and short,
that even a tyro can see that the evil passions and ac-
170 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
tions of primeval men are the effects and not the causes
of their troubles.
The remedy for the troubles of primeval mankind —
so far as those troubles could be corrected — lay, not in
stamping out individual ill will, but in changing the re-
lations obtaining between man and his physical environ-
ment. If he had not learned how to develop the earth's*
resources man would have remained on the level of ani-
mality. The foundation of human development is to be
sought in those material arts whereby nature is entrapped,
circumvented, and controlled by the human intellect. De-
stroy all knowledge of material art, and you reduce pres-
ent day people to the levels of animality and the primitive
struggle for existence. Nothing in the line of morality
would prevent retrogression. To be sure, human progress
involves moral progress — but as effect rather than as
cause. Those who think and speak about morality as if
it were a cause, and not a phase of something far more
inclusive, do not understand the real nature of morality.
To advocate "righteousness" as a primary factor of hu-
man development is like advising a man to lift himself by
his boot-straps. The real nature of human progress is to
be found in the intellectual development of man.
§ 97. — Intellectual development, however, has not
been uniform in the human race. The artificial progress
of early man, as we have learned, was not everywhere the
same; and this inequality of art threw out into even
bolder relief the inequality of nature. Under these con-
ditions, cosmic forces, acting unconsciously — without
human planning, — pounded out an engine, or institution,
through which art could operate. In the midst of the
primitive struggle for existence the beginnings of material
art and progress converted the petty fights of small social
groups into the great wars of tribes and nations, and
ushered in the historic period. The engine through which
art worked out into civilization was cleavage; and under
this institution three great historic civilizations have been
thus far projected above the plane of barbarism.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 171
In the age of the new theology, however, the evil
tendencies of cleavage in oriental society had plainly over-
balanced its benefits. It cannot be too many times em-
phasized that the prophets found themselves in the midst
of a situation that forced the vast majority of the lower
class in a multiplying population to bid against each other
for the favor of a small upper class which monopolized
the physical environment. On the whole ^ the resulting
evils were the outcome of no human planning. The situ-
ation proceeded to the same issue all over Israel. It pro-
ceeds at length to the same issue in every civilization. To
the superficial observer, it seems indeed as if the upper
class were in a vast conspiracy against the lower. But
this is only in appearance. Never in human history has
there been such a conspiracy. Cleavage is primarily a
result of the cosmic forces that raise human society out
of animality. It cannot be denied that many wealthy men
have taken deliberate evil advantage of the needs of poor
men. Such sins give color to the charge of a conspiracy.
But they are incidental phenomena tvithin the larger cir-
cle of relations based upon social cleavage itself ; and they
are, in truth, properly to be dealt with on the individual
basis. Whether the rich take culpable advantage of the
poor or not, it is inevitable (if our general thesis be cor-
rect) that social evolution should everywhere uncon-
sciously involve an upper class, based at first on monopoly
of human beings, and later on monopoly of the earth.
When land monopoly reaches its inevitable issue, it pro-
duces the situation that existed in the times of the pro-
phets. A small upper class monopolizes the soil, the
source of all supply. The individuals of the lower class,
under the constant pressure of immediate bodily needs,
and without property of any kind, bid against each other
for opportunity to work. Wages are naturally at the
hand-to-mouth level. The lower class cannot accumulate
property. The individuals in the upper class, not unrea-
sonably imbued with the idea of the uncertainties of life,
struggle to increase their resources to the greatest pos-
172 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
sible degree. Those below the line of cleavage, driven by
immediate physical necessity, do the deeds that come un-
der the head of the sins of poverty. Those above the line
of cleavage commit the characteristic sins of the spoiled
children of wealth. But the social problem involved in
the situation is not the issue of individual unrighteous-
ness. On the contrary the unrighteousness is the result
of the social problem. Certain observations by Dr. E. B.
Andrews respecting modern social conditions are perti-
nent: "Few of the wrongs brought to light," he says,
"involve personal guilt or sin on anyone's part. They
mainly consist of social maladjustments for which no one
in particular is responsible, and which are to be removed,
if at all, by general social effort" (57).
§ 98. — In addition to extracts already made from
the prophets, we now reproduce a number of passages
which more fully exhibit their attitude with reference to
the general problem. In these passages we shall notice —
Clear evidence of a sharp line of social cleavage;
Extreme dependence on the part of the lower class;
Luxury in the upper class, indicating the diversion
of lower-class labor from production of capital and other
useful wealth;
An intensely individualistic tone on the part of the
prophets.
"Yahweh will enter into judgment with the elders of
his people, and the princes thereof: It is ye that have
eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your
houses : what mean ye that ye crush my people, and grind
the face of the poor? saith the lord Yahweh of hosts.
Moreover Yahweh said, Because the daughters of Zion
are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and
wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and make
a tinkling with their feet: therefore Yahweh will smite
with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of
Zion. . . In that day Yahweh will take away the
bravery of their anklets, and the cauls and the crescents ;
the pendants, and the bracelets, and the mufflers; the
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 17S.
headtires and the ankle chains, and the sashes, and the
perfume boxes, and the amulets ; the rings and the nose
jewels; the festival robes, and the mantles, and the
shawls, and the satchels; the hand mirrors, and the fine
linen, and the turbans, and the veils (Isaiah 3:14 f.).
Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and to them that
are secure in the mountain of Samaria [the capitals of the
two kingdoms of Israel], the notable men of the chief of
the nations to whom the house of Israel come! . . .
Ye that put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of
violence to come near; that lie upon beds of ivory and
stretch themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs
out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the
stall; that sing idle songs to the sound of the viol; that
devise for themselves instruments of music, like David;
that drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the
chief ointments (Amos 6:1-6). Forasmuch therefore as^
ye trample upon the poor, and take exactions from him
of wheat; ye have built houses of hewn stone, but ye
shall not dwell in them; ye have planted pleasant vine-
yards, but ye shall not drink the wine thereof (Amos
5 : 11). For they know not to do right, saith Yahweh, who
store up violence and robbery in their palaces. . .
And I will smite the winter house with the summer house ;.
and the houses of ivory shall perish, and the great houses
shall have an end saith Yahweh (Amos 3:10, 15). For
I know how manifold are your transgressions and how
mighty are your sins; ye that afflict the just, that take
a bribe, and that turn aside the needy in the gate (Amos
5 : 12). And I said, Hear, I pray you, ye heads of Jacob,
and rulers of the house of Israel : is it not for you to
know judgment? who hate the good and love the evil ; wha
pluck off their skin from off them, and their flesh from
off their bones ; who also eat the flesh of my people ; and
they flay their skins from off them, and break their bones :
yea, they chop them in pieces, as for the pot, and as flesh
within the cauldron (Micah 3: 1-3). Their hands are upon
that which is evil to do it diligently. The prince asketh,,
174 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
and the judge is ready for a reward; and the great man,
he uttereth the mischief of his soul. Thus they weave it
together. The best of them is as a brier. The most up-
right is worse than a thorn hedge ( Micah 7 : 3, 4). Th6
godly man is perished out of the earth, and there is none
upright among men. They all lie in wait for blood. They
hunt every man his brother with a net. A man's enemies
are the men of his own clan (Micah 7: 2, 6). Run ye to
and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, and see now,
and know, and seek in the broad places thereof, if ye can
find a man, if there be any that doeth justly, that seeketh
faithfulness (Jeremiah 5 : 1). Wash you, make you clean;
put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes.
Cease to do evil. Learn to do well. Seek judgment. Re-
lieve the oppressed. Judge the fatherless. Plead for the
widow" (Isaiah 1:16, 17).
§ 99. — From the evidence already brought forward,
and in the light of still further evidence, to be cited pres-
ently, it is clear that the prophets committed what is
called in logic a "post-hoc fallacy." * All around them
they beheld the worship of Yahweh mingled with the
service of other gods. All around they saw evil conduct.
These things were plainly and notoriously associated with
the decline of Israel from that glorious and ideal condi-
tion w^herein every free man dwelt safely, "un-
der his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beer-
sheba," and wherein the people "were many, as the sand
which is by the sea in multitude, eating and drinking and
making merry." The prophets, giving expression to the
feeling of a certain part of their fellow countrymen, boldly
pointed to these things as the causes of Israel's troubles.
Let us not be understood to claim that the demand for
personal righteousness cannot legitimately be raised.
What we are asserting is, that the prophets, with ever in-
creasing emphasis, pointed to individual conduct as the
* More fully : Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 175
cause and cure of a social, collective, institutional mal-
adjustment.
Possibly it may be claimed that, after all, the pro-
phets were concerned with individual problems, not with
social problems. But, although they said nothing in so
many words about what we now call the social problem,
it cannot be successfully claimed that their object was
individual, and not social. Our inquiry shows, by broad
and well founded inductions, that the fundamental difii-
culty in the age of the prophets was collective, institu-
tional, cosmic, and not individual. The prophets were
therefore trying to solve a social problem, whether they
realized it or not; and their program of individual
righteousness was, in effect, put forward as a social
remedy. They said nothing explicitly about society, be-
cause society, as we have seen, develops primarily under
the forms of individualism. The sociological conception
was too abstract for the ancient Semitic mind. The pro-
phets of Israel accordingly took society at its formal, or
face, value as an individualistic mass ; and since they un-
consciously ignored its essence, they failed to establish
a law of connection between the phenomena.
§ 100. — The reader may not irrelevantly ask what,
then, was the remedy for the situation.
We reply : Theoretically, there was perhaps a rem-
edy; but practically, there was no solution for the prob-
lem. We must lift our eyes from Israel, and look at the
entire oriental world. No local corrective, however sa-
gaciously applied, would have been efficient. Had Israel
succeeded in reforming itself, and in establishing the
prosperity of all classes, the little nation would have been
— as it actually was in time — crushed out by one or
more of the powerful and greedy empires around. These
empires were also tormented by an internal pressure
which drove them to military expansion whenever and
wherever possible. To have been effective, a wise read-
justment of oriental society must have been instituted in
a sufficiently large number of states to combine in defense
176 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
of the reform. But such a thing was impossible. Ancient
oriental civilization did not possess the requisite intelli-
gence and public spirit. We saw that the evils of the
primitive struggle for existence were ameliorated, not
primarily by moral progress, but through intellectual ad-
vance; and the same truth ever obtains with iron con-
sistency. So far as it permits of solution, the problem of
cleavage constitutes a draft upon the intellect. The pro-
phets did not see that satisfactory moral relations are
always, in the long run, based upon satisfactory economic
relations. They failed to perceive that the organization
of mankind for the production of food, clothing, and
shelter, underlies and conditions every phase and quality
of human life.
§ 101. — Along with, and incidental to, the social
preaching of the prophets there went a theological devel-
opment which must be noticed at this point, although it
did not proceed to its logical issue in the official religion
of Israel until after the Babylonian Exile.
The great, outstanding fact is, that Yahweh, after
having been originally thought of as a local deity, like
Chemosh, or Dagon, was at length regarded by his wor-
shippers as the imperial god of heaven and earth. All
that the Israelite doctrine of monotheism came to, how-
ever, as hinted in an earlier connection, w^as the magnifi-
cation of Yahweh, and the corresponding minification of
all other gods, until, in the minds of his worshippers, for-
eign deities were depressed to a very low level. In the
furthest reaches of its thought, Israel never compassed
the conception of an exclusive God — the Absolute God of
modern philosophical Christianity. The monotheism
finally reached by Israel was a practical, not an absolute,
monotheism. This finds expression, for instance, in the
first verse of the eighty-second psalm, where it is declared
that God "judgeth among the gods.''. Likewise, we read
in Exodus 15 : 11, "Who is like unto thee, O Yahweh,
among the gods?" To the same effect, in Exodus 12: 12,
the following declaration is put into the mouth of Yah-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 177
weh : "Against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judg-
ments." This qualified, or practical, monotheism was
carried over bodily into early Christianity. The apostle
Paul, in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10 says : "Concerning there-
fore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that
no idol is anything in the world, and that there is no God
but one. For though there be that are called gods,
whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many,
and lords many ; yet to us there is one God, the Father.''
"But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice,
they sacrifice to demons [incorrectly translated "devils"],
and not to God. And I would not that ye should have com-
munion with demons." In these passages Paul recog-
nizes that physical idols are nothing, but that the idols
represent inferior gods and lords in the realm of spir-
its (58).
§ 102. — As just observed, the doctrine of the imper-
ial supremacy of Yahweh did not become a part of the
official religion of Israel until after the Exile; and we
must now note more fully the pre-Exilic basis of that doc-
trine.
We have seen that, according to the national tradi-
tions, Yahweh had positively demonstrated his superior-
ity over all gods with whom he had come in contact. He
had chosen Israel, and given them victory over the
Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites,
Edomites, Syrians, and Amalekites. Finally, at the time
of the bloody revolutions of Jehu and Jehoash in the first
age of the new theology, he had driven out the god of
Tyre. He was thus greater than the gods of all these na-
tions. He had shown that he could, if he would, vanquish
and subject any god with whom he came in conflict. In
this way the idea of his imperial supremacy had oppor-
tunities for growth, and for authoritative and extrava-
gant statement, before the age of the writing prophets.
According to the new theology, as represented by the
prophets, it was evidently the intention of Yahweh to sub-
12
178 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ject the world to his cliosen people if Israel should re-
main faithful to their side of the Sinai contract. But his
plans were interrupted by the sins of Israel. If Israel
would repent, these plans would go on to their logical
issue. Yahweh would make Israel an imperial nation;
and prove that he was an imperial god.
This doctrine took complete possession of the pro-
phets. It seemed so plain and simple to them that they
marvelled at the obtuseness of their fellow-countrymen.
They begged and pleaded for the people to be faithful to
Yahweh, and to practice personal righteousness. They
vehemently promised that if their program were carried
into effect, Yahweh would abundantly pardon, and that
Israel should see peace, prosperity and national grandeur.
But the mass of the people could not be moved. The
bloody revolution of Jehu represented the high- water
mark of popular interest in the new theology. The pro-
phets, however, were not satisfied with this, for Yahweh
evidently demanded more, as proved by the fact that
prosperity did not return to Israel.*
It is in the bitter disappointment of the prophets at
the indifference of the majority that we must seek the
proximate influence, or force, which prompted what little
these men did in the development of Israel's monotheisni.
They announced their diagnosis of the situation. It
seemed perfectly clear to them. But it did not seem so
clear and practical to the majority of their contempo-
raries. "Repent!" cried the prophets. And the people, by
their natural indifference and inertia, replied in effect:
"We will not repent." "But think of what Yahweh has
done for his people!" exclaimed the prophets in despera-
tion. "In the olden time he raised Israel up to a splendid
state of prosperity and glory. Other nations were sub-
ject to us. Every free man sat under his own vine and fig
tree, and enjoyed his own heritage. Their lines were
* There were a number of "reformations" in addition to that of
Jehu and Jehoash ; but we make no mention of them in the text.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 179
cast in pleasant places; and Yahweh gave them a goodly
heritage. His plans were going on to grand fruition. But
Israel deserted him, and walked unrighteously. There-
fore, after bearing long with you, he hid his face, and
turned, and did you hurt. If ye will but return, he will
again do you good. The baalim and all foreign gods are
vanities and lies ! They are subject to Yahweh, every one
of them! Behold, what a mighty helper Israel is volun-
tarily deserting!" The prophets were not conscious that
their emphasis upon the imperial power and supremacy
of Yahweh was, on the whole, a novel item in their preach-
ing; and this is a very significant fact. Their theology,
indeed, was plainly incidental, and subordinate, to their
social preaching. They made use of Yahweh as a mag-
net wherewith to draw the people into a program which
they thought would solve the social problem ; and it was
but natural, under such circumstances, that they should
present the god of Israel in the most alluring and at-
tractive and powerful character possible.
We have here all the elements of a dramatic situation
involving the most intense mental stress. About a cen-
tury after the death of Elijah, and while continuing to
exhort by word of mouth, the prophets began to commit
their doctrines to writing. Their contemporaries would
not heed their advice; and they would leave a witness
to future ages. The writings of the pre-Exilic prophets
reveal a desperation perhaps never exceeded in the hist-
ory of the human mind. Beginning with Amos in the
eighth century, they conclude with Jeremiah in the sixth
century; and so fierce did the invective become in this
last great prophet before the Exile, that when we wish
to characterize a speech that goes to a great length of
censure and abuse, we sometimes call it a "jeremiad."
The prophets applied the most extravagant terms of re-
proach to their fellow countrymen. They became
fanatics, possessed of one idea, going about with dis-
hevelled hair and wild eyes, crying out alternately the
vengeance and love of Yahweh.
180 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
§ 103. — The prophetic doctrine was crystallized in a
startling form by the advance of the Assyrians.
We have seen that it was no new thing in ancient
thought for a god to bring trouble upon his people, and
even to give them into captivity. "In every misfortune
that overtook a commonwealth/' says Professor Duncker,
"in every calamity, a bad harvest, an infectious disorder,
a reverse in war, the Greeks saw the effects of divine
anger" (59). In Numbers 21 : 29 we read : "Thou art un-
done, O people of Chemosh. He hath given his sons as
fugitives, and his daughters into captivity." In the Moa-
bite inscription, we saw that Chemosh was angry with his
land, and permitted the Moabites to be chastised; but
that afterward he turned, and fought for them again.
In line with these ideas, the prophets made a condi-
tional prediction respecting the future of their people.
They declared that unless Israel repented, Yahweh would
bring a foreigner upon them, who should carry them away
captive as a punishment for their sins. But the prophets
added that if this calamity came to pass, a righteous rem-
nant should at length return to dwell in the land in the
knowledge and fear of Yahweh.
§ 104. — About the year 721 b. c.^ the northern Is-
raelite kingdom was brought under subjection by As-
syria; part of its inhabitants were carried into a cap-
tivity from which they never returned ; and the land was
flooded with foreign colonists. This left only the little
kingdom of Judah in the south as the legal representative
of the life and traditions of Israel.
About a century and a quarter later, however, in the
year 597 b. c.^ Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, began
the captivity of Judah also.
§ 105. — We should note particularly that the captive
Judeans were not all carried away at the same time.
There were two deportations, about ten years apart.
And we should also take particular notice of the so-
cial character and station of the exiles in the two de-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 181
portations, for at this critical period the fundamental fact
of cleavage comes out again into bold projection.
In Jeremiah 27 : 20 we read that Nebuchadnezzar
^^carried away captive Jeconiah, the king of Judah, and
all the nobles of Judah and Jerusalem." In Jeremiah
24 : 1 we read, to practically the same effect, that the king
of Babylon "carried away captive Jeconiah, king of
Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen
and smiths from Jerusalem and brought them to Baby-
lon." In 2 Kings 24 : 14, 15, we read, somewhat more
fully, that the king of Babylon "carried away all Jerusa-
lem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valor,
even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and the
smiths. And he carried away Jeconiah to Babylon, and
the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers,
and the chief men of the land, carried he into captivity
from Jerusalem to Babylon." In short, the first deporta-
tion was recruited principally from the upper class.
On the other hand, we are told in 2 Kings 24 : 14 that
"none remained save the poorest sort of the people of the
land." Over these the king of Babylon appointed an un-
der-king, giving him the name of Zedekiah.
There might have been but one deportation had not
the under-king revolted against the overlordship of the
king of Babylon. This occurred about ten years after
the commencement of the Judean captivity. Nebuchad-
nezzar with his army again made a successful assault
upon Jerusalem. The second batch of captives now taken
away was of course largely from the lower class.
But even now the country was not entirely depopu-
lated. We read, in Jeremiah 52 : 16 that "the captain of
the guard left of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers
and husbandmen." (Cf. Jeremiah 40:7; and 2 Kings
25 : 12).
§ 106. — The exilic social situation has been so well
set forth by Professor G. A. Smith that we reproduce his
words.
182 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
^'The first host of exiles, the captives of 598, com-
prised . . . the better class of the nation, and appear
to have enjoyed considerable independence. . . .
They remained in communities, with their own official
heads, and at liberty to consult their prophets. They
were sufficiently in touch with one another, and suffi-
ciently numerous, for the enemies of Babylon to regard
them as a considerable political influence, and to treat
with them for a revolution against their captors. But
Ezekiel's strong condemnation of this intrigue exhibits
their leaders on good terms with the government. Jere-
miah bade them throw themselves into the life of the land ;
buy and sell, and increase their families and property.
. . . There is every reason to believe therefore that
this captivity was an honorable and an easy one. The
captives may have brought some property with them;
they had leisure for the pursuit of business and for the
study and practice of their religion. . . . Some, by
their learning and abstinence, rose to high positions in
the court. Probably to the end of the exile they remained
the good figs, as Jeremiah had called them. Theirs was,
perhaps, the literary work of the exile; and theirs, too,
may have been the wealth which rebuilt Jerusalem.
"But it was different with the second capitvity, of
589. After the famine, the burning of the city, and the
prolonged march, this second host of exiles must have
reached Babylonia in an impoverished condition" (60).
§ 107. — Although they were fairly well treated, the
exiled Israelites (who were now called "Jews") looked
back upon their far away native land with homesick long-
ing. The stirring events of the time stimulated reflection
upon the history and religion of their forefathers. Israel
in exile pondered over the past.
During and subsequent to the Babylonian Exile the
religious consciousness of Israel gradually absorbed the
new theology. The great prophets, most of whom had
been long dead, seemed to be wonderfully and miracu-
lously vindicated by history. Looking backward over the
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 183
past, the exiles thought how Yahweh had chosen their
forefathers; how a contract of mutual faithfulness had
been made between people and god; and how much had
been done for Israel by their covenant god. They thought
how they had not done unto their god as he had done unto
them ; and how they had insulted him by worshipping the
Canaanite deities and foreign gods whom he had defeated.
Then they remembered in bitterness of spirit how trouble
had begun to come upon Israel. Following this, they re-
viewed the rise of the new theology and the new prophet-
ism, recalling how the prophets had warned the people
that their troubles were due to unfaithfulness; and that
if they did not repent of their sins, Yahweh would bring
upon them an invader who should carry them away cap-
tive as the culmination of all their misfortunes. And
now, behold! All had come to pass as the prophets had
said. Israel was in captivity in a foreign land. The pro-
phets, therefore, grew in stature during the Exile.
§ 108. — But what does it signify to say that the
religious consciousness of Israel absorbed the new the-
ology? Does it mean that the great social object of the
prophets was at length attained? and that Israel was
henceforth to set the pace for humanity in the work of
social reform? Nothing of the kind! We are once more
face to face with the ancient phenomenal dualism whereof
cleavage is an illustration. The prophets triumphed, —
and the prophets failed ! Unless we realize this tremend-
ous paradox, we are not prepared fully to appreciate their
work.
Let us first look at the prophetic triumph. The
official religion of Israel before the Exile admitted the
godship of other deities than Yahweh on equal terms with
him; and his sovereignty was unofficial. But the reli-
gion of Israel as at length officially established after the
Exile incorporated the doctrine of the moral holiness and
the imperial sovereignty of Yahweh ; and while admitting
the existence of other gods, placed them at an utterly in-
ferior level. Yahweh became the master of the whole
184 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
earth, and all the heaven, and the waters under the earth.
The Exile, as the culmination of the troubles of once im-
perial and expanding Israel, was held to prove the pro-
phetic claim that Yahweh was the supreme god. On be-
half of Israel he had defeated every god against whom he
had been matched, until at last the unfaithfulness of his
chosen people had exhausted his patience, and forced him
to reverse his policy. Instead of driving away foreign
gods, he now brought these deities and their votaries
against his chosen people by way of punishment. Accord-
ing to this view, which was advocated by the prophets
in opposition to the old, conventional theology, the defeat
of Israel by the Assyrians and Babylonians was not the
defeat of Yahweh, as the older theology claimed. It was
the work of Yahweh himself, who thus evidently con-
trolled all nations and gods at his imperial pleasure. Ex-
treme ritual faithfulness to Yahweh in this magnified
character became, therefore, the cornerstone of the official
religion of Israel after the Exile. By extreme faithful-
ness to Yahweh as thus conceived, the Jews were to win
back the favor which they had forfeited. A prince of the
Davidic line was to be seated in glory on the throne of his
father David. He was to be the anointed of Yahweh, like
David of old — the new Messyah, or Messiah. Unto him
should be the desire of all nations, and the government
should be upon his shoulder. The splendor of the first
national kingdom, interrupted only by the sins of Israel,
was to return ; and all the world was to acknowledge the
sovereignty of Yahweh and the rule of Israel. Judaism
officially elevated ritual to the level of ethics. Practically,
indeed, it went even further than this. It lifted ritual
above ethics; and the moralism of prophecy slumbered
in the long night of legalism, only to be awakened at last
by the great paradox of history, the prophet of Nazareth.
But w^e are almost ahead of our subject. Let us now
turn to the failure of prophetism. The prophets did not
preach a morality that can save society. Their injunc-
tions respecting righteousness were barren of social con-
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 185
tent. They were individualists in the midst of a social
fabric whose problems called for something far more than
the individualistic interpretation. They did not under-
stand that individual conduct is an expression of cosmic
forces. They did not know that in last analysis the prob-
lems of society grow out of cosmic conditions, and not
out of personal ill will ; and that while it is of course best
that the individual should at all times do good according
to his light, the problems of society, as such, can only be
rightly approached from the cosmic side, and not from the
standpoint of personal righteousness. Doubtless the ex-
iled Israelites, under the influence of temporary emotions,
made many good resolutions along the line of personal
righteousness; but after the Exile, as we shall presently
see, social cleavage and the social problem existed as be-
fore.*
* As this examination is attempting a scientific inquiry in the field
of sociology, and not in that of theology, we are debarred from saying any-
thing in the text about the religious value and significance of the history
tinder survey. But we here note the following suggestions : The ethical
monotheism of Israel would never have come into existence if the righte-
ousness of the prophets — i. e., individualistic righteousness — were a
valid counsel of social salvation. We interpret the psychology of the
prophets inductively and deductively, as an involution of ordinary human
consciousness. The human consciousness, as revealed more and more
by modern psychology and sociology, is always animated by motives which
are described from the phenomenal standpoint by the term "secular."
That is to say, the great theological and religious movements of history,
whatever may be their transcendental significance, resolve into secular
movements in disguise. Thus we exhibit the prophets as animated pri-
marily by the desire for social welfare; and although this interpretation
of their consciousness will be new to some readers, it is not essentially
different from that which has now become a commonplace in the field of
critical scholarship. As our text shows, however, while we agree on the
fact, we part company with the devout wing of critical scholarship on
the interpretation of the fact. We assert that the post-hoc fallacy of
prophetism saved the religion of Israel to the world. This leads us to
the second suggestion: The conventional religions of the heathen world
are based upon the assumption that human salvation is mechanically im-
parted from without by the will of the divine. The revelation of science
on the contrary, is that human salvation is derived from within, by the
186 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY,
§ 109. — The mind of Israel during the Exile found
expression in several new prophets who arose in that
period. Chief of these is the so-called "Second Isaiah," the
unknown author of a part of our present book of Isaiah.
Only a part of the material in the first thirty-nine chapters
of the present book of Isaiah can possibly be attributed
to the original prophet of that name. The remainder of
the book was written long after his time, during the Baby-
lonian Exile, and later still.
The introduction to the book of the second Isaiah
is a cheerful proclamation to the captives from Judah and
Jerusalem : "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith
your god. Speak ye to the heart of Jerusalem, and qvj
out to her that her time of service is accomplished, that
her iniquity is pardoned ; and that She hath received from
Yahweh's hand double for all her sins" (Isaiah 40:1, 2).
At last, then, after more than a generation, Israel is to
return across the rough desert into his own land.
The prophet speaks in a highly figurative way about
the return through the wilderness : "The voice of one that
crieth. Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Yahweh,
make straight in the desert a highway for our god. Everjr
valley shall be filled up, and every mountain and hill
shall be levelled ; and the crooked shall be made straight,,
and the rough places smooth" ( Isaiah 40 : 3, 4).
§ 110. — But how will all this come to pass? Is Yah-
weh to make a visible descent from heaven, and restore
his people to Judah and Jerusalem? The prophet makes
no such claim. He simply puts a theological interpreta-
tion upon the history going on around him. A new power,
development of the intellect. All human progress is primarily based on
the intellect. In harmony with science, and in startling contrast with
heathen religions, the faith of Israel, as based upon the work of the
prophets and extended into Christianity by Jesus and Paul, is the only
religion which has ever practically succeeded in bringing the emotions
into line with the intellect in affirmation of the doctrine that we are
naturally in the attitude of having "no good thing in us," and of "working
out our own salvation with fear and trembling."
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 187
coming from the east and from the north — a great host,
led by Cyrus, king of Persia — was in full career of con-
quest. The doings of Cyrus were being noised all over
the world; and the prophetic spirit of Israel was quick
to utilize the situation. According to the prophet, king
Cyrus was an instrument in the hands of Yahweh. At
the bidding of Yahweh he was to conquer the corrupt and
declining Babylonians, and let the captive Israelites re-
turn to their old home. In Isaiah 41 : 25 we read : "I
have raised up one from the north, and he is come; from
the rising of the sun one that calleth upon my name ; and
he shall come upon rulers as upon mortar, and as the
potter treadeth clay." In chapter 44 : 28 the prophet is
even more explicit, indicating the advancing conqueror
by name: "Cyrus is my shepherd, and shall perform all
my pleasure, even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be built ;
and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid."
§ 111. — The aristocratic tendency is irrepressible.
Looking into the future in imagination, one of these later
prophets declares: "They shall build up the old wastes;
they shall raise up the former desolations ; and they shall
repair the waste cities, the desolations of many genera-
tions. And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks;
and aliens shall be your plowmen and vinedressers. But
ye shall be named the priests of Yahweh. Men shall call
you the ministers of our god. Ye shall eat the wealth of
the nations, and to their glory shall you succeed" (Isaiah
61:4, 7). In other words, after the restoration Israel
as a whole is to occupy the position of an upper class in
respect of the world at large. The instinct of cleavage
will not down.
§ 112. — In the year 538 B. c.^ Cyrus, king of Persia,
overthrew the kingdom of Babylon, and rode triumphantly
into the great city on the Euphrates. His aim was to con-
quer the world. The greatest power that now opposed his
westward march was Egypt. Some ten years before this
time, Egypt, observing the rise of Persia, had joined an
188 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
alliance against that power. In line with his general
policy, king Cyrus now gave the Jewish exiles permission
to return to their old home, stipulating, of course, that
they acknowledge his overlordship, and pay him tribute.
Judah would be a good buffer-province between Egypt and
Persia; and would serve as a convenient base of opera-
tions in a campaign against the land of the Nile. From the
standpoint of Cyrus, the return of the Jewish exiles was
merely a Persian colonizing scheme.
§ 113. — Concerning the social state of the Jews
after the Exile we reproduce the following from Professor
G. A. Smith :
"Some sixty years after the earlier, and some fifty
years after the later, of Nebuchadnezzar's two deporta-
tions, we find the Jews a largely multiplied and still regu-
larly organized nation, with considerable property and de-
cided political influence. Not more than forty thousand
can have gone into exile, but forty-two thousand returned,
and yet left a large portion of the nation behind them.
The old families and clans survived ; the social ranks were
respected; the rich still held slaves; and the former
menials of the temple could again be gathered together.
Large subscriptions were raised for the pilgrimage, and
for the restoration of the temple" (61).
The Exile, then, despite its theological influence, ef-
fected no change in the fundamental economic institutions
of Israel. Cleavage remained, based as before upon slav-
ery and private property in land. The second chapter of
the book of Ezra supplies a long list of the free families
that returned, omitting not to add that they were accom-
panied by seven thousand, three hundred and thirty-seven
slaves (Cf. Nehemiah 7).* With respect to landed property
ancestral claims were doubtless revived as far as possible.
All the free men, however, may have acquired estates at
*Doubtless these family lists are to be taken as a post-exilic census,
rather than as a literal record of the "return;" but since neither version
affects our thesis adversely, and since both support it, the historical
point need not be pressed in this connection.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 189-
first ; but as the later history shows, the contraction of the
monopolistic upper stratum began promptly.
§ 114. — Without attempting to trace this history fur-
ther we shall close our study of Israel and of oriental civ-
ilization with a few additional notices.
We have seen that the return from the Exile did not
include all the Jews who had been settled in Babylonia.
About eighty years after the first home-coming, a second
band of exiles, among whom was Ezra the scribe, crossed
the wilderness. A few years later still a Jewish aristo-
crat and Persian court-functionary, named Nehemiah, ob-
tained the permission of the Persian king to regulate mat-
ters in Judah. Armed with governmental powers he ap-
peared in Jerusalem about 445 b. c. An interesting view
of economic conditions at that time is found in Nehemi-
ah's book, from which we reproduce the following passage,
already quoted in part:
"Then there arose a great cry of the people and of
their wives against their brethren the Jews. For there
were that said. We, our sons and our daughters are many.
Let us get corn, that we may eat and live. Some also there
were that said. We are mortgaging our fields, and our
vineyards, and our houses. Let us get corn, because of the
dearth. There were also that said. We have borrowed
money for the king's tribute upon our fields and our vine-
yards. Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren,
our children as their children. And, lo, we bring into
bondage our sons and our daughters to be slaves, and some
of our daughters are brought into bondage already.
Neither is it in our power to help it, for other men have
our fields and our vineyards. And I was very angry when
I heard their cry and these words. Then I consulted with
myself, and contended with the nobles and the rulers, and
said unto them. Ye exact interest every one of his brother.
And I held a great assembly against them. And
I said unto them. We after our ability have redeemed
our brethren the Jews, which were sold unto the
heathen; and would ye even sell your brethren, and
190 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
should they be sold unto us? Then held they their
peace, and found never a word. Also I said, the
thing that ye do is not good. Ought ye not to walk in the
fear of our god, because of the reproach of the heathen,
our enemies? And I likewise, my brethren and my slaves,
do lend them money and corn on interest. I pray you, let
us leave off this interest. Restore, I pray you, to them,
^even this day, their fields, their vineyards, their olive-
yards, and their houses, also the hundredth part of the
money, and of the corn, the wine, and the oil, that ye ex-
act of them. Then said they. We will restore them, and
will require nothing of them ; so will we do, even as thou
sayest. Then I called the priests, and took an oath of
them, that they should do according to this promise. Also
I shook out my lap, and said. So God shake out every man
from his house, and from his labor, that performeth not
this promise; even thus be he shaken out, and emptied.
And all the congregation said. Amen, and praised Yah-
weh. And the people did according to this promise" (Ne-
hemiah 5 : 1-13).
Doubtless a large part of the trouble in this case grew
out of the special circumstances wherein the attendance
and labor of rich and poor alike were demanded upon the
hasty re-building of the Jerusalem wall. But the illus-
tration exhibits universal elements which cannot be
ignored ; and it throws a lurid light upon the social condi-
tions of the time. Nehemiah was a good and an altruistic
man ; but his individualistic interpretations and remedies,
although they have been on record for more than two thou-
sand years, have not been serviceable to social reform. A
further quotation from the same chapter shows Nehemiah
more fully in the character of a benevolent and wealthy
ruler :
"Moreover from the time that I was appointed to be
their governor in the land of Judah, from the twentieth
year even unto the two and thirtieth year of Artaxerxes
the king, twelve years, I and my brethren have not eaten
the bread of the governor. But the former governors that
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 191
were before me were chargeable unto the people, and took
of them bread and wine at the rate of forty shekels of sil-
ver. Yea, even their slaves bare rule over the people; but
so did not I, because of the fear of God. Yea, also I con-
tinued in the work of this wall, neither bought we any
land; and all my slaves were gathered thither unto the
work. Moreover there were at my table of the Jews and
the rulers an hundred and fifty men, beside those that
<?ame unto us from among the heathen that were round
about us. Now that which was prepared for one day was
one ox and six choice sheep; also fowls were prepared for
me, and once in ten days, store of all sorts of wine. Yet
for all this I demanded not the bread of the governor, be-
cause the bondage was heavy upon this people" (Nehe-
miah 5 : 14-18).
The conditions here illustrated prevailed, not only be-
fore the times referred to, but from those days onward
into the age of Jesus. Indeed, the same conditions, modi-
:fied only by the gradual introduction of western ideas and
capital, exist in that country today. The social problem
had passed from the acute to the chronic form before the
Exile; and it was nothing less than chronic after the Ex-
ile. The post-Exilic proverbs, wisdom writings, and
psalms contain material of importance to the doctrine of
cleavage. We cannot cite nor discuss it in full here; and
shall make only a few quotations and comments.
The post-Exilic sections of the book of Isaiah yield
material which reflects a social condition exactly repeat-
ing that of the older times. In the following passages an
unknown prophetic writer puts these words into the
mouth of Yahweh: "Behold, in your fast-day ye follow
your [own] business [i. e., to the neglect of my service],
oppressing all your workmen. — Is not this the fast that I
have chosen? to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the
yoke, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break
every yoke? — None calleth in righteousness and none
pleadeth in truth. They trust in vanity, and speak lies.
They conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity. — Their
192 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in
their hands. Their feet run to evil, and they make haste
to shed innocent blood. Their thoughts are thoughts of
iniquity. Desolation and destruction are in their paths.
The way of peace they know not, and there is no judgment
in their goings. — Judgment is turned away backward,
and righteousness standeth afar off. For truth is fallen
in the street, and uprightness cannot enter. Yea,
truth is lacking; and he that departeth from evil [i. e.,
ceases to oppress others] maketh himself a prey [to the
wicked]" (Isaiah 58 :3, 6; 59 :4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15).
In the first appendix to the book of Proverbs, by Agur
ben Jakeh, we find a familiar strain : "There is a genera-
tion whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as
knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the
needy from among men" (Proverbs 30:14).
The introduction to the second appendix lays much
emphasis upon judging righteously the cause of the poor
and afllicted. The body of the second appendix is a well
known picture of the ideal upper-class wife, whose husband
sits among the elders and rulers at the city gate. She is a
good manager and worker in her household ; she carefully
orders the tasks of her slaves and hirelings ; she is kind to
all and gives to the needy poor. But, significantly, this is
only a picture of an ideal, for the writer asks, "Who can
find such a woman?" (Proverbs 31).
The book of Proverbs itself has much to say about
upper and lower classes. Thus : "The rich ruleth over the
poor; and the borrower is slave to the lender" (Proverbs
22: 7). "The strong city of the rich man is his wealth.
The poverty of the poor is their destruction" (Proverbs
10 : 15).*
*We must bear in mind that the word translated "poor" does not
describe the entire lower class. It makes no reference to the many
legal slaves ; and refers primarily to free-born Israelites who, by their
own or their ancestors' misfortunes, find themselves in the lower, un-
propertied class. It is from such as these that the ranks of the poorly
paid "hired servants" were doubtless filled.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 193
Observe the complacent theism of the aristocrat who
writes: "Thou maintainest my lot. The lines are fallen
unto me in pleasant places. Yea, I have a goodly heri-
tage'' (Psalm 16:5,6).
In the apocryphal book, The Wisdom of the Son of
Sirach, dating from the second century b. c.^ we find these
words : "What agreement is there between the hyena and
a dog? and what peace between the rich and the poor? As
the wild ass is the lion's prey in the wilderness: so the
rich eat up the poor. As the proud hate humility : so doth
the rich abhor the poor" (Sirach 13 : 18-20). "The rich
hath great labor in gathering riches together ; and when he
resteth he is filled with his luxuries. The poor laboreth in
his poor estate ;' and when he leaveth off he is still needy"
(Sirach 31:3, 4).
The son of Sirach also sets forth his views upon upper
and lower classes in the following passage :
"The wisdom of a learned man cometh by opportunity
of leisure; and he that hath little business shall become
wise. How can he get wisdom that holdeth the plow, and
that glorieth in the goad, that driveth oxen, and is occu-
pied in their labors, and whose talk is of bullocks? He
giveth his mind to make furrows; and is diligent to giv&
the kine fodder. So every carpenter and workmaster,
that laboreth night and day : and they cut and grave seals,^
and are diligent to make great variety, and give them-
selves to counterfeit imagery, and watch to finish a work.
The smith also sitting by the anvil, and considering the
iron work, the vapor of the fire wasteth his fiesh, and he
fighteth with the heat of the furnaces. The noise of the
hammer and the anvil is ever in his ears, and his eyes look
still upon the pattern of the thing that he maketh. He
setteth his mind to finish his work, and watcheth to polish
it perfectly. So doth the potter sitting at his work, and
turning the wheel about with his feet, who is always care-
fully set at his work, and maketh all his work by number.
13
194 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
He f ashioneth the clay with his arm, and boweth down his
strength before his feet. He applieth himself to lead it
over; and he is diligent to make clean the furnace. All
these trust to their hands; and every one is wise in his
work. Without these a city can not be inhabited; and
they shall not dwell where they will, nor go up and down.
They shall not be sought for in public council, nor sit high
in the congregation. They shall not sit on the judges' seat,
nor understand the sentence of judgment. They can not
declare justice and judgment; and they shall not be found
where parables are spoken" (Sirach 38: 24-33).
At the time when the son of Sirach wrote his book,
Judah had been brought under the rule of Greece. The
oriental world had, indeed, long since lost its primacy. A
new civilization had arisen out of barbarism, and was ac-
quiring the headship of the world. The center of histori-
cal interest gradually shifts from the eastern seaboard of
the Mediterranean to the northern coasts of the Great Sea.
(1)— Craig, The Semitic Series, I (N. Y., 1899), Preface.
(2) — Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt (London, 1894. Tirard's trans.),
p. 99f. Cf. pp. 80, 81.
(3) — Brugsch, History of Egypt (London, 1881. Smith's trans.),
I, p. 28. Cf. Meyer, in Encyclopedia Biblica (N. Y., 1902), III, col. 3752.
(4)_Bagehot, Physics and Politics, (N. Y., 1881), p. 25.
(5) — Maspero, The Dawn of Civilization (London, 1896. McClure's
trans.), pp. 52, 53 and note.
(6)— Idem, chap. 4. Cf. p. 70.
(7) — Rawlinson, History of Ancient Egypt (Boston, 1882), II, pp.
141, 142. Cf. Rogers, History of Babylonia and Assyria (N. Y., 1901),
II, pp. 278-280, 314.
(8) — Lenormant, Ancient History (London, 1871), II, p. 353.
(9) — Maspero, Dawn of Civ., p. 268.
(10) — Idem, p. 300. Cf. Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians (N. Y.,
1900), p. 175.
(11)— Sayce, ibid., p. 67. Cf. p. 149. Cf. Maspero, Dawn of Civ.
pp. 742-745.
(12)— Mueller, in Encyclopedia Biblica (N. Y., 1901), II, col. 1224.
(13) — Rawlinson, History of Ancient Egypt, I, p. 493. Cf. Wil-
kinson, The Ancient Egyptians (Boston, 1883), I, pp. 38, 280, 284. Cf.
Rogers, History of Babylonia and Assyria, II, p. 280.
ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION. 195
(14)— Cf. Brugsch, History of Egypt, I, p. 403. Cf. Rogers, His-
tory of Babylonia and Assyria, II, p. 224. Cf. Ashley, English Econo-
mic History (N. Y., 1894), I, pp. 70, 115 note 9. Cf. Mommsen, History
of Rome (N. Y., Dickson's trans.), I, pp. 261, 262.
(15) — Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, p. 173. Cf. p. 107.
(16) — Rawlinson, History of Ancient Egypt, I, 496.
(17)— Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, pp. 180-186.
(18)— EwALD, History of Israel (London, 1867, Trans.), I, p. 294.
(19) — Brugsch, History of Egypt, I, p. 29.
(20)— Idem, pp. 28, 29.
(21) — Maspero, Life in Ancient Egypt and Assyria (N. Y., 1899,
Trans.), p. 9.
(22)— Idem, p. 11.
(23) — Idem, Dawn of Civ., p. 296. Cf. p. 290 for a case in point.
(24) — Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, p. 67.
(25)— W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites (London, 1894),
p. 29.
(26) — Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, p. 256.
(27) — Maspero, Dawn of Civ., p. 303. Cf. Rogers, History of Baby-
lonia and Assyria, II, p. 133. Cf. Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, p.
173.
(28)— Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, pp. 80, 81. Cf. p. 99.
(29)— Maspero, Dawn of Civ., p. 679.
(30)— King, in Encyclopedia Biblica (N. Y., 1899), I, col. 433.
(31) — Rogers, History of Babylonia and Assyria, II, pp. 278, 279.
(32) — Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, pp. 228, 229. On oriental
education, cf. Laurie, Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Education
(London, 1900), pp. 38-48, 57-61.
(33)— Renan, History of the People of Israel (Boston), II, p. 225.
(34)— Cf. McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monuments (N.
Y., 1896), I, chap. 2. Cf. Barton, Semitic Origins (N. Y., 1902), pp.
1-29, 270. Cf. Kent, History of the Hebrew People (N. Y. 1899), I,
chap. 5.
(35)— CoRNiL, The Prophets of Israel (Chicago, 1897), p. 3f. Cf.
Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (N. Y.,
1892), pp. 2-4.
C36)— Journal of the Anthropological Institute, XI, pp. 364, 365.
Cited by Spencer, Principles of Sociology (N. Y., 1895), I, p. 774. Cf.
Sully, Studies of Childhood (N. Y., 1896), p. 103f. Cf. Larcom, A New
England Girlhood (Boston, 1891), p. 137.
(37)— Mommsen, History of Rome, I, pp. 213, 214. Cf. Reville,
Native Religions of Mexico and Peru (London, 1895), p. 77.
(38)— W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites (London, 1894),
pp. 29, 30. Cf. McCurdy, History, Prophecy, etc., (N. Y., 1897), II, p. 133.
(39)— Allen, Evolution of the Idea of God (N. Y., 1897), pp. 80,
81, 82.
196 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
(40)— Driver, in Encyclopedia Biblica (N. Y., 1902), III, article
"Mesha."
(41) — Wellhausen, History of Israel and Judah (London, 1891),
p. 23.
(42)— W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel (London, 1897), p. 379.
(43)— Cf. BuDDE, The Religion of Israel to the Exile (N. Y., 1899),
chap. 1, and passim. Cf. Barton, Semitic Origins (N. Y., 1902), chap. 7.
We are greatly indebted to the excellent treatise of Budde.
(44) — Cf. W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites (London,
1894), p. 372. Cf. KuENEN, The Religion of Israel (London, 1882, May's
trans.), I, pp. 236f., 250.
(45) — Cf. W. R. Smith, Rel. of Semites, pp. 3, 4. Cf. Wellhausen,
History of Israel, etc., (London 1891), p. 16. Cf. Kent, History of
the Hebrew People (N. Y., 1899), I, pp. 41, 97, 201; II, p. 97. Cf.
MuRisoN, Totemism in the Old Testament (Biblical World, Chicago,
Sept. 1901).
(46)— Paton, Early History of Syria and Palestine (N. Y., 1901),
pp. 1-103. McCuRDY, History, Prophecy, etc., I, p. 163f. ; II, p. 5f. Well-
hausen, History of Israel, etc., p. 31.
(47) — Cf. Budde, The Religion of Israel to the Exile, chap. 2.
(48) — Wellhausen, History of Israel, etc., p. 35. Cf. W. R.
Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church (N. Y., 1891), p. 269.
McCuRDY, History, Prophecy, etc., I, p 228; II, p. 6.
(49) — Wellhausen, History of Israel, etc., p. 8. Cf. Cornil, His-
tory of the People of Israel (Chicago, 1899), p. 48.
(50) — Green, History of the English People, Bk. 3, chap. 1.
(51) — Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, p. 256.
(52) — FiSKE, The Beginnings of New England (Boston, 1900),
p. 245.
(53)— Bruce, Apologetics (N. Y., 1899), p. 280.
(54)_Paton, Early History of Syria and Palestine, p. 227. Cf.
W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel, pp. 88, 89.
(55)— G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets (N. Y.,
1898), I, p. 377.
(56) — KiRKPATRicK, The Doctrine of the Prophets (London, 1901),
pp. 225, 226.
(57)— Hartford Seminary Notes (Hartford, Conn.), IV, p. 126.
(58)_Cf. Toy, Judaism and Christianity (Boston, 1892), p. 77f.
Cf. W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel (London, 1897), p. 59f. Cf.
Bruce, Apologetics, p. 176f.
(59) — DuNCKER, History of Greece (London, 1886. Alleyne and
Abbott's trans.), II, p. 228.
(60)— G. A. Smith, The Book of Isaiah (N. Y., 1900), II, p. 57f.
(61) — Idem, ibid.
CHAPTER VI.
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION.
§ 115. — The social development of classic civilization
began on the same level as did that of the oriental world.
In the background of the history of Greece and Italy, as
in that of the ancient east, is the shifting scene of tribal
migration and war. A passage relating to the early ages
of Greece, written by the Greek historian Thucydides in
the fifth century b. c.^ is worth reproducing in this connec-
tion for its general suggestiveness :
"The country was not regularly settled in ancient
times. The people were migratory, and readily left their
homes whenever they were overpowered by numbers.
There was no commerce, and they could not safely hold in-
tercourse with one another either by land or sea. The
several tribes cultivated their own soil just enough to ob-
tain a maintenance from it. But they had no accumula-
tions of wealth . . . , for being without walls, they
were never sure that an invader might not come and de-
spoil them. Living in this manner . . . , they were
always ready to migrate; so that they had neither great
cities nor any considerable resources" (1).
§ 116. — Modern archaeological research proves that
there was a prehistoric civilization located on the north
Mediterranean coasts prior to the appearance of the Greeks
and Romans. Probably these early communities were not
wholly swept away. Their people were doubtless partly
exterminated and partly subjugated by the tribes that
came pouring down from central and eastern Europe to
found the Greek and Roman communities of historic
times (2).
(197)
198 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
The earliest historic societies in these regions exhibit
cleavage into upper and lower strata. In both Greece and
Italy the upper social stratum was originally composed of
the clan aristocracy, which constituted a slaveholding,
landowning class. This class was the legal element in the
State ; and it controlled the policies of government. Thus
we see that the societies destined to compose the classic
civilization began politically on the same level as the
oriental world (3).
In society as thus constituted it signifies nothing to
the principle of cleavage-capitalization whether govern-
ment assumes the monarchial or the republican form. Po-
litical moralists cannot extract lessons from the expe-
riences of Greek and Koman republics in which the "peo-
ple" cast out their kings, and replaced them by frequently
elected officers. For the people in these cases were like the
people in, say, ancient Israel. That is, they were not the
people in the modern sense, but merely the upper classes.
The establishment of an ancient republic was far from
being a democratic event in the modern sense. Indeed,
such a procedure might rivet more firmly the power of the
nobility by unseating a king who was disposed ^o remedy
the worst abuses of class rule, and substituting an official
whose tenure depended upon the good will of an upper-
class electorate (4).
§ 117. — No settled community long exists without the
exchange of labor products. The social history of Greece
and Italy was early marked by the rise of domestic and
foreign trade, and the establishment of towns and cities.
This may perhaps, to some extent, be regarded as a re-
vival of the prehistoric commerce of those countries.
§ 118. — Just as in the Orient, so here, commerce was
primarily the exchange of lower-class products among the
upper orders.
At first the tendency was for commerce to remain in
the hands, or under the proprietary control, of the nobil-
ity. It was doubtless to some extent personally managed
by the nobility at first, but more and more by slave-stew-
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 199
ards, as was the practice in the east. In harmony with
our conception, Mommsen holds that there was no dis-
tinctively commercial class in early historic Rome. He
says :
"No special superior class of merchants distinct from
and independent of the class of landed proprietors de-
veloped itself in Eome. The reason for this surprising [?]
phenomenon was, that the wholesale commerce of Latium
was from the beginning in the hands of the large landed
proprietors — a hypothesis which is not so singular as it
seems. It was natural that in a country intersected by
several navigable rivers the great landholder, who was
paid by his tenants their quotas of produce in kind, should
come at an early period to possess barks ; and there is evi-
dence that such was the case. The transmarine traffic
conducted on the trader's own account must therefore
have fallen into the hands of the great landholder, seeing
that he alone possessed the vessels for it and — in his pro-
duce — the articles for export. In fact the distinction be-
tween a landed and a moneyed aristocracy was unknown
to the Romans of earlier times ; the great landholders were
at the same time the speculators and the capitalists" (5).
§ 119. — But the economic phase of life in classic civ-
ilization began to escape the control of the family nobility
at an early date in the historical period. Commerce became
more and more active; and began to move in greater vol-
ume and through vaster circuits than the trade of the
Orient. The old nobility, while retaining their landed es-
tates and slaves, and the monopoly of government, found
it advantageous to grant personal freedom to many of the
slave-managers of trade, as well as to invite the settlement
of commercial foreigners under guarantee of exemption
from seizure. This was a sign of the advancing differen-
tiation of society — the division of labor. The nobility
themselves could not manage their own and the public bus-
iness, and at the same time personally attend to the grow-
ing demands of trade ; and it became necessary for them to
enact laws guaranteeing absolute liberty and self-owner-
200 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ship to a limited class in order to secure the most efficient
management of commerce. These changes took place
gradually between the eighth and fifth centuries b. c.
Mommsen writes :
"Kome was in fact a commercial city, which was in-
debted for the commencement of its importance to interna-
tional commerce, and which with a noble liberality granted
the privilege of settlement to every child of an unequal
marriage, to every manumitted slave, and to every
stranger who surrendering his rights in his native land
emigrated to Kome" (6).
The following passage from Curtius, relative to con-
ditions in Greece at the close of the seventh century B. G.,
should also be read in this connection :
"Wherever a sea abounding in harbors washed the
shore a new class of men was arising . . . composed of
those engaged in industrial pursuits . . . This class
would necessarily rise in proportion as trade spread over
all the coasts, and the gains of commerce were reaped
which were flowing forth in rich abundance out of the col-
onies in the east and west, out of the interior of Asia, and
above all out of the newly opened valley of the Nile.
These acquisitions would be accompanied by a universal
social transformation; and in Attica, also, notwithstand-
ing that the native nobility themselves endeavored to
profit by the new resources, the ancient state of things
could never more be maintained" (7).
§ 120. — The mercantile and manufacturing classes,
which thus grew up and increased greatly, did not repre-
sent the rise of the people in the modern sense. Although
drawn from the lower class by a process of social selection,
they were essentially an expansion of the upper class out-
side the limits of the original clan aristocracy, whose de-
scendants continued to monopolize the control of the
State. The vast lower class remained as before in actual
or practical slavery, its labor controlled by the superior
stratum. The mercantile order managed the exchange of
labor products in the upper class, and grew rich by re-
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION, 201
taining as compensation some of the wealth which passed
through its hands. Likewise, the manufacturing order
naturally found its patronage in the upper class. Mer-
chants and manufacturers alike grew rich; bought lands
and slaves of their own ; and thus became, in fact if not at
first in law, a part of the upper stratum.
§ 121. — In the East, as we have remarked before, the
growth of the newly rich class probably did not much ex-
ceed the absorptive power of the older, noble families.
Marriage and adoption assimilated them with the
clan aristocracy. In classic civilization, however, the
"third estate" grew so rapidly and so large that a new po-
litical problem arose.
The nobility of the ancient clanships were naturally
jealous of the newly rich, who, without aristocratic con-
nections or political power, were somehow rising to a man-
ifest economic equality with the "old families," and some-
times to a position of superiority. Since this new section
of the upper class was excluded from the government, it
lay under the rule of the nobility, which possessed the
courts of justice, a monopolistic knowledge of the unpub-
lished law based on old tribal and clan customs, and the
control of the taxing power. Thus, the older section of the
upper class was able to, and did, harass the newer section
in many ways. Probably the strained relations between
them arose in part out of the economic obligations of the
older nobility to the newer wealthy men. To use the
words of the historian Duncker —
"As soon as the mariners and traders attained a wider
and more extensive view of life, and the new impressions
made upon them by foreigners led to reflections and com-
parisons, they must have felt that their interests were not
consulted in the government of the nobles, that the com-
monwealth gave them no chance of representing those in-
terests, that they had no acquaintance with the laws ac-
cording to which the nobles decided the rights of property
, . . , and that . . . judges awarded punishments
and penalties according to a very arbitrary standard.
202 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Why should the merchant and the shipowner, they must
have inquired, stand so far below the noble?" (8).
§ 122. — The internal political history of Greece and
Kome narrates the struggles between these elements of the
upper class. The old nobility was everywhere forced to
retreat, and make one concession after another. In the
most progressive parts of Greece "the rule of the nobles
gave way to a rule of the rich. Energetic men who had
made their own way in the world were no longer excluded
from civic power and office" (9). Similar developments
took place in Rome, of whose history in this period we ob-
tain a glimpse in the following passage by Mommsen:
"Beyond doubt from the very filrst a portion of ,the
leading plebeian families had attached themselves to the
movement party, partly from a sense of what was due ta
the fellow-members of their order, partly in consequence
of the natural bond which unites all who are treated as in-
ferior, and partly because they perceived that concessions
to the multitude were inevitable in the issue, and that, if
turned to due account, they would result in the abroga-
tion of the exclusive rights of the patriciate and would
thereby give to the plebian aristocracy a decisive prepon-
derance in the state. Should this conviction become — as
was inevitable — more and more prevalent, and should the
plebeian aristocracy at the head of its order take up the
struggle with the patrician nobility, it would wield in the
tribunate a legalized instrument of civil warfare, and it
might, with the weapon of social distress, so fight its bat-
tles as to dictate to the nobility the terms of peace and, in
the position of mediator between the two parties, compel
its' own admission to the offices of state . . . Nothing
shows so clearly the defencelessness of the clan-nobility
when opposed to the united plebs, as the fact that the fun-
damental principle of the exclusive party — the invalidity
of marriage between patricians and plebeians — fell at the
first blow scarcely four years after the decemviral revolu-
tion" (10).
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION, 20a
Through this great political change, the classic soci-
eties in their corporate character passed from the ancient
family basis to the basis of property. The road to legal
membership in the State lay no longer through the chan-
nel of ancient descent, nor of adoption or marriage into
the noble families. Noble descent, although a much prized
social honor, no longer conferred special privileges. The
legal right of every man to a voice in public affairs was
recognized — provided that he were free, and had prop-
erty of a certain value. Sometimes the franchise was not
limited by a property qualification. The practice was not
uniform.* But there was always a restriction of this
kind upon the right to hold important offices. Although
government was therefore still in the hands of the upper
class, this change was in reality a great political step in
advance of earlier practice. The State in something like
its modern form appeared.
§ 123. — It should be emphasized that the govern-
ments wherein the new aristocracy won a place beside the
old nobility were democratic in form but not in substance.
The Greek and Roman republics were not popular, demo-
cratic republics in the modern sense. Mr. Mahaffy has
well said that the Greek democracies were one and all
slaveholding democracies, and that for each freeman with
a vote there were at least three or four slaves (11) ; and it
is not too much to declare, with Merivale, that "at no
period within the sphere of historic records was the com-
monwealth of Eome anything but an oligarchy of war-
riors and slaveholders" (12).
§ 124. — Not only did the classic peoples rise out of
barbarism, and form relatively stable communities in
possession of numerous arts; they assimilated the results
of oriental culture; and made invaluable contributions of
their own to human progress. As Greece and Rome grad-
ually brought the civilized world within the scope of their
influence and power, all around the shores of the Mediter-
* We can state the facts only in the most general form here.
204 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ranean and far inland, the impediments to a broader
social intercourse, hitherto raised by local speech, local
custom, local religion, and local habits of thought, were
swept away. Throughout the vast world thus gathered
under a single government the rights of citizenship were
conferred upon large and increasing numbers without re-
gard to descent, and sometimes without reference to prop-
erty. In contrast with the older tribal and national nar-
rowness, how stimulating it is to hear Paul the apostle, in
a far-off province of the Roman Empire, stay the hand of
authority by uttering the magic formula : "I am a Roman
citizen!"
§ 125. — But this great circle of communities waxed
and waned like the oriental peoples. In the later, as in
the earlier, civilization the abuses of cleavage eventually
outweighed its benefits; and the pressure of militant in-
vaders became irresistible. The soil was gathered up in
the hands of a landowning class (13) ; and since all avail-
able territory in Europe, Asia, and Africa had been con-
quered and occupied, there was no further opportunity
for colonizing unappropriated lands with poor men. The
continents were, in fact, full of savage and barbarian
tribes, many of whom were themselves restlessly in search
of new homes ; and the declining military power of Rome
was unequal to the farther extension of her empire.
It is true that the territory embraced in classic civil-
ization was not fully settled nor improved. The popula-
tion was no more overcrowded with reference to the stand-
ing room and natural resources afforded by the land than
the population of modern countries. But, like modern
countries, and like ancient Israel and her neighbors, the
classic world held its unused soil at a price. Whoever
wanted to invest capital in projects of any kind had first
to pay into private hands either a lump sum, or an annual
rent, for bare location ; and then submit to annual public
taxation. The public revenue system, having come down
from the earlier, nomadic period of social development,
was ill adjusted to the needs of settled society. The man
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 206-
who held land out of use at a price was taxed little or noth-
ing ; and was thus encouraged to speculate in unused nat-
ural opportunities. The man who wished to invest capi-
tal in planting the ground, or in putting up dwelling
houses and stores, was discouraged by the same policy. If
a heavy tax had been resting upon land values, it would
have been impossible for luxurious Roman senators and
Athenian aristocrats to hold land out of use; while the
expenses confronting the investment of capital would have
been greatly reduced.
But no such change was made, nor even thought of.
The multiplying population stived and sweltered, without
secure means of a livelihood, without property, and conse-
quently without patriotism. In the last half of the second
century before Christ, the Gracchi met death at the hands
of the upper classes in a poor but sincere attempt to rem-
edy the economic situation; and they stand for perhaps
the greatest wisdom that classic civilization ever brought
to bear upon the social problem. "Soldiers of Italy !' cried
Tiberius Gracchus, "You are called lords of the earth ; but
you do not possess a single clod to call your own!"
In the age of the Gracchi, indeed, the Roman army
had already entered upon that course of deterioration
which was at last to prove fatal to Rome herself. The sup
ply of patriotic soldiers — men with spirit to defend their
country — was running short; and the ranks were being
filled up with slaves, poverty stricken freemen, and bar-
barians. The latter element grew more and more in num-
bers, until at last Rome defended herself against the bar-
barians by hiring barbarians to fight her battles against
their own brothers. What wonder is it that the barbar-
ians at length overwhelmed the classic world in a mighty
flood, and subverted the second great civilization in the
world's history?
At this period all the moral evils with which the
prophets of Israel had contended were prevalent. Every-
where the multiplying lower class was partly in personal
bondage and partly free. But the upper class monopo-
206 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
lized the earth; and whether the members of the lower
class were free in form or not, they were nowhere free in
fact. They lived in a world which was itself the prop-
erty of a class; and their immediate bodily needs forced
them to compete with each other for the economic favor of
that class. Between the upper and nether millstones of
taxation and monopoly, the lower classes were in misery.
Their labor produced wealth of all kinds; but they con-
sumed little of their own products. As in oriental civili-
zation and in present day society, this appropriated labor
was more and more diverted from the production of capi-
tal and useful wealth to the production of luxury for the
upper class. Labor is diverted from capital to luxury in
the proportion that it becomes unprofitable to invest new
<!apital in business. And as luxury and poverty increase,
the evil personal conduct growing directly out of these
conditions also increases. The sins of poverty and the sins
of wealth come hand in hand.
It is as idle to charge the decline and fall of classic
civilization to individual moral decay as to charge the like
in the case of oriental civilization, or to say that the evils
of the primitive struggle for existence w^ere due to the lack
of gentleness and good will. Many people, however, are
still of the ancient persuasion. "The collapse of the Ro-
man power through loss of moral virility," says Professor
Peabody, "is the most solemn proof which history pro-
vides that righteousness alone exalteth a people'* (14).
But if our contention is worth anything, the decline of
Rome was itself the cause, not the effect, of evil conduct.
If Rome collapsed because of the unrighteousness of her
people, it follows that she must previously have risen as a
consequence of righteousness. But if we are to speak
scientifically of personal conduct as connected with social
progress and social decline, we must criticise our cate-
gories more carefully, and revise our definitions.
§ 126. — In this declining civilization, with its inter-
nal and external troubles, a new institution gradually
arose — the Christian Church. Christianity took its rise on
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 207
the soil of the oriental world in a territory then ruled by
Eome — the little country of Judea, which was all that
remained of the old national kingdom of Israel. Striking
its roots into the soil of the Jewish faith, and centering
about the person of Jesus the prophet of Nazareth, the
new religion presently spread throughout the classic
world.
§ 127. — At the opening of the Christian era both up-
per and lower classes among the Jews were anxiously ex-
pecting the king long foretold by the prophets. He was to
be the Messiah, the annointed, or chosen, of Yahweh.
Upon his advent was to be established the great Messianic
kingdom — the kingdom of God, or of Heaven. The Mes-
siah was to be the earthly king ; but the real King was to
be Yahweh, god of all. The glorious times of David and
Solomon were to return with added glory. Jerusalem was
to take the place of Eome and of old Babylon as the im-
perial city of the world. All men were to be subject to the
Jews, and to serve Yahweh, the King of heaven and earth.
Disease, war, and famine were to be abolished. Eich Jews
were to become richer ; while the lower classes anticipated
an era of "righteousness" and "justice" wherein their op-
pressions and hardships were to cease (15).
§ 128. — A careful study of the books of the gospel
seems to show that the message of Jesus resolves itself un-
der three general heads :
1 : The Proclamation of the Kingdom.
2 : The Characterization of the King.
3 : The Interpretation of the Kingdom.
§ 129. — By the proclamation of the kingdom Jesus
connected his preaching with the current hopes of his
race. This was the earliest element of his message. Ac-
cording to the most primitive gospel records, Jesus began
his public ministry with the words: "The time is ful-
filled ; and the kingdom of God is at hand. Eepent ; and
believe the good news" (Mark 1:15). According to the
Matthew-account his preaching opened with the same
thought : "Eepent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"
208 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
(Matthew 4:17). These phrases, "kingdom of God" and
"kingdom of heaven/' are practically synonymous; and
they occur frequently in the reports of the words of Jesus.
§ 130. — In taking up the second element of this mes-
sage — the characterization of the Divine King — we
must once more turn back the pages of history. It is a
commonplace that the predominant conception of deity in
the literature of the Old Testament represents a much
harsher and more violent being than the predominant con-
ception in the books of the New Testament. The older lit-
erature, indeed, frequently reflects the most violent ideas
of deity. But in the later literature we are conscious of
entering a different atmosphere. In the New Testament we
find the universal God of love. Now, the newer concep-
tion has become the common property of mankind through
the personality of Jesus ; and in order to begin to estimate
this element of his preaching it is necessary to do some-
thing more than study Jesus himself.
We have learned that in the earlier stages of social
evolution it is the heads of families, the leaders of the
"fathers' houses," who alone constitute the legal element
in the community. This is a general sociological truth.
The supremacy of fatherhood in politics obtained through-
out the entire oriental civilization. It was the law at first
in classic civilization ; and it also obtained at first among
the ancestors of our own w^estern peoples. The conception
of fatherhood is at first closely associated with the idea of
protection against enemies. It was the fathers in early
days that were the chief warriors and defenders of so-
ciety. When they went to war on behalf of their families
and homes they went in their paternal character. They
loved their kindred after a fashion; but their love was
rough as compared with what we now understand by the
word; and it could hardly be extended to include
strangers.
We have seen that the ancient gods were developed
out of dead chiefs and clan leaders ; and it is not at all re-
markable, therefore, that the gods of early men should be
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 209
represented as partaking of the general character of early-
men themselves. Ancient gods were thus primarily war
gods. Yahweh was a god of barbarian tribes which at-
tacked and occupied the lands of other peoples, and' which
were in turn compelled to defend themselves against re-
peated invasions. Hence, like the deities of barbarians in
general, he was mostly thought of as a god of armies, and
as a god mighty in battle (Psalm 24). In 1 Samuel 7:10
we read that Yahweh thundered upon the Philistines (Of.
1 Samuel 2 :10). In Psalm 29 :3 we read : "The god of
glory thundereth." In harmony with these conceptions
we read at greater length in Psalm 18th as follows:
"Then the earth shook and trembled. The foundations
also of the mountains moved and were shaken because he
was wroth. There went up a smoke out of his nostrils;
and fire out of his mouth devoured. Coals were kindled
by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and
thick darkness was under his feet. Yahweh also thun-
dered in the heavens ; and the Most High uttered his voice ;
hailstones and coals of fire. He sent out his arrows, and
scattered them; yea, many lightnings, and discomfited
them.'' The point here is, that Yahweh w^as principally
thought of in Old Testament times as a strong and vio-
lent god. In brief, theology reflected sociology.
But we have seen that society moved upward through
important stages of evolution between the times of the Old
Testament and the New. The earlier system of govern-
ment founded on the family aristocracy had passed into
the modern system of government founded on property
and personal freedom regardless of descent. No longer
monopolized by the "father's houses," government passed
out of the period wherein the fathers, in their paternal
character, controlled the people and fought the battles of
society. The State — that is to say, society in its corpor-
ate capacity — moved out of the personal stage of poli-
tics into the impersonal stage. Governmental activities
and political rights, although open to fathers, no longer
14
210 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
pertained to fathers in their paternal character. A citi-
zen did not necessarily belong to an ancient noble family.
When fathers went into battle, they went, not in their
paternal character, but simply as men under the direc-
tion of governments no longer monopolized by fatherhood.
The area of peace was vaster than hitherto. There were
not so many petty wars. If the conflicts on the frontier
equalled or exceeded the conflicts of ancient days, they
were farther away, and the actual social space within
which men came into peaceful contact was greater than it
had ever been before. These changes, although gradual,
were nothing less than revolutionary; and their effect
upon social psychology was profound. Fatherhood grew
more industrial and peaceful in character. The family,
no longer the main pillar of the state, underwent an in-
ternal development within the state itself. Love between
the members of the family increased as compared with love
at earlier stages of progress. The ideal of fatherhood was
no longer associated with blood, thunder and military
protection. It lost its barbarian ferocity, and grew more
industrial, peaceful, and lovable. In other words, the evo-
lution of society pours a wealth of new meaning into the
fact and into the ideal of fatherhood. All this is a part of
what came to mankind through the classic civilization;
and it was the classic world which, long before the time of
Jesus, extended itself around the shores of the Mediter-
ranean, and included the remains of Israel within the
mighty circle of its influence.
Jesus was a city man of the humbler sort, although
not by any means from the lowest levels of the lower class.
Up to about the age of thirty, his life, like that of Joseph,
the head of the family, was occupied in the pursuits of in-
dustry. There is no hint that the rude currents of war
ever disturbed his home, and involved him in the fiercer
conflicts of men. The vast society whereof he was a part
had in his day accumulated a greater stock of intangible
capital in the form of Peace than the world had known
hitherto. Like most Jewish boys, Jesus had been duly in-
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 211
structed in the idealized history of his forefathers ; and he
had early shown a disposition to study the ancient his-
tories and prophecies of his race. Doubtless, too, he read
such other scanty literature as came within the range of
his limited opportunities. But mostly the literature of his
people held his thought. The learning of Jesus, however,
was not like the learning of the priests and scribes. He
read the sacred books of his race with the liberal eye of the
prophet, not with the contracted vision of legalistic priests
and scribes. The first and second Isaiahs were prominent
among his teachers; and his life and influence are proof
that in him the ancient spirit of prophecy, after a sleep of
centuries, at last re-awoke, and attained the crown of its
development. His life and influence have, indeed, com-
pletely justified the verdict of his contemporaries, "A
great prophet is arisen among us " (Luke 7:16. Cf. Gos-
pels, passim).
The psychology of prophetism always associates the
prophet closely with Divinity; and it is not strange that
after Jesus had connected his ideas with the hopes of his
race by proclaiming the advent of the Divine Kingdom, he
.should advance to the characterization of the Divine King,
the real head of the new polity. In the order of time this
was not the first element of his teaching. In the order of
logic and practical importance, however, it was first and
fundamental. The proclamation of the kingdom was in-
troductory and subsidiary to it.
On looking into the sacred books of his people, Jesus
found that although the predominant conception of Di-
vinity in ancient Israel was harsh and violent, Yahweh
had been frequently spoken of as a father. Most of these
references merely relate to the Israelites, either in the
singular or in the plural, and not to the world at large.*
In 2 Samuel 7:14 Yahweh is brought into personal rela-
tion with King Solomon thus : "I will be his father, and
*Cf. Hosea 11: 1; Isaiah 1: 2; Jeremiah 3: 4; ibid., 31: 9;
Malachr 1:6; Psalm 2:7; Psalm 89 : 26, 27 ; Deuteronomy 1 : 31 ; ibid.,
5:5; ibid., 14: 1; ibid.. 32: 6; Exodus 4: 22.
212 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
he shall be my son." In Psalm 103 :13 a similitude from
fatherhood is used. Yahweh is there said to pity those
that fear him — not those that do not fear him — as a
father pities his children. But fatherhood in connection
with ancient gods was mostly thought of in the formal,
corporate, collective, impersonal sense. The Israelite felt
that he was "a son of Yahweh," not because he was an
individual man, but because he was an Israelite. It is the
custom of the clan aristocracy in the early days of all his-
toric nations to connect themselves with the gods by direct
descent. Thus, the Anglo-Saxon kings claimed to have
descended from the god Woden. Thus, the Moabites are
spoken of in Numbers 21:29 as the children of the god
Chemosh : "Thou art undone, O people of Chemosh. He
hath given his sons as fugitives, and his daughters into
captivity." It is true that, so far as Israel was concerned,
Yahweh was a covenant god, and not a god who had grown
up with Israel from the beginning. But that would make
no difference. The fathers of ancient tribes were spoken
of as "our fathers" by outsiders who were adopted or mar-
ried into these tribes; and foster-parents are always ad-
dressed under the same forms as natural parents. On the
basis of these facts, then, Jesus had good grounds for
thinking of Yahweh in the paternal character, and for
speaking of him as a father. But fatherhood in the mind
and the teaching of Jesus did not stand for what father-
hood represented in the Old Testament; and we are now
coming closer to the sources of his basic doctrine.
The work of the earlier prophets, in transforming the
practical polytheism of Israel before the Exile into the
practical monotheism of post-Exilic Israel, made it unnec-
essary for Jesus to put stress on the doctrine of mono-
theism. This phase of the doctrine of God was therefore
no characteristic part of the personal work of Jesus. He
quietly assumed the monotheism which was now an ofi&cial
doctrine of his people.
The fundamental element of his preaching was, we
think, the product of three considerations : (a) Yahweh the
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 213
imperial god, as established through earlier history, and
prophetism; (b) Yahweh the father, established in this
character on the basis of early tradition, which asserts the
paternity of all the gods; and (c) the ideal of fatherhood
as transformed by social evolution between the times of
the Old and New Testaments. If Yahweh were the god
of all mankind, and if he were also a father, he must be all
that was novj implied in the sociology of fatherhood. In
short, he must be the loving father of every man, regard-
less of nationality or descent, just as the individual was
now admitted to political rights regardless of descent or
previous condition of servitude. The more primitive re-
ligious thought of Israel had authoritatively declared the
fatherhood of Yahweh. Nevertheless, the leading idea of
him, as found in the literature of the Old Testament, was
harsh and barbaric. His love was for Israel, and for those
in Israel that feared him. Ancient theology reflected an-
cient sociology. The discrepancy between the leading Old
Testament idea of Yahweh as a god of hosts, mighty in
battle, and Yahweh as a father, worked upon the con-
sciousness of Jesus. There was no sense of history in his
day; and, preoccupied with the newer and more modern
social psychology of fatherhood, the liberal genius of the
new prophet overleaped the discrepancy in the ancient
doctrines, and read back into the word "father," which
had been applied to Yahweh in the days of old, all the
wealth of new meaning which the evolution of society had
poured into the fact and the ideal of fatherhood. In the
religion of Jesus, theology thus again reflected sociology.
In brief, Jesus brought theology down to date.
As noiselessly as a flower grows and blooms in the
sunshine, so the newer doctrine of God grew in the mind
of Jesus. There was no sense of history in his day; and
although the loving father of all mankind, as preached by
Jesus, represents an advance over the Old Testament god
of armies, mighty in battle, yet Jesus was not, and could
not be, conscious of presenting a new religious doctrine.
At the most, he thought of himself as emphasizing an ele-
214 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ment of the divine character which, for some reason that
he perhaps did not speculate about, had not been presented
by the earlier prophets. He became completely possessed
and inspired by the conception ; and his favorite term for
the God of heaven and earth was simply "Father." The
thought of the Old Testament god of armies, battles, and
thunder seems out of place in the New Testament
writings.
Thus theology develops. The line of prophetism runs
backward into the darkness of prehistoric times. Affirma-
tions about the gods are passed on from generation to
generation. As historical development pours new mean-
ings into old terms, later-coming prophets read these
meanings back into the old terms; and theology is again
and again brought down to date. So far as we are able to
judge, Jesus did not have the slightest consciousness that
he was introducing what was practically a new theological
doctrine; and in the considerations here set forth we see
the basis for the paradoxical fact that he could proclaim
a new doctrine under the impression that it was old. "A
prophet is never a repeater of commonplaces," observes
Dr. Bruce, in his work on Apologetics. "When we find
him affirming any new truth with intensity and iteration,
we may be sure it is a new truth, at least in respect of the
amount of conviction with which it is uttered, and the
connections of thought in which it is introduced" (16).
The mass of the people in the time of Jesus and in later
ages, have unconsciously shown by their attitude that in
him they find a doctrine which is not adequately expressed
by any earlier prophet. His place in history is, indeed,
bound up with his emphasis upon the loving fatherhood of
a universal God.*
*The following sentences doubtless well represent the most
important phase of the psychology of Jesus: "Father, the world
knew thee not, but I knew thee" (John 17: 25). "No one knoweth the
Father but the Son" (Matthew 11 : 27). "No one knoweth who the Father
is, save the Son." (Luke 10:22). Jesus was plainly conscious that his
fundamental idea of Divinity had never been entertained by the world
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 216
§ 131. — Having announced the advent of the divine
kingdom, and characterized the King, Jesus proceeded to
interpret the nature of the kingdom. Much of this part
of his teaching may be regarded as a deduction from his
doctrine of the universal divine fatherhood. But just as
his doctrine of God reflected the sociology of his age, so
his doctrine of the kingdom is plainly, if unconsciously,
an outgrowth of the social conditions about him. The
whole teaching of Jesus is so inextricably bound up with
itself, and with the conditions of his age, that it is hard to
discriminate justly.
The Greeks and Komans, by breaking up the limita-
tions of tribalism and nationality, and gathering men into
a larger social aggregate than the world had ever seen
before, furnished a dramatic suggestion of the brother-
hood of all men. Accordingly, whether we are to regard
Jesus' interpretation of the kingdom as a deduction from
the newer doctrine of the universal fatherhood of God, or
as being suggested by social conditions, or as partly
a development from both, it is not strange to find
at large. Yet, for the reasons given in the text, his doctrine of the
divine fatherhood could not present itself to him save as expressing
an ancient fact. He may have wondered why no earlier man had appre-
hended the Divine as he did ; but the lack of historical and social science
in his day shut out all possibility of explanation; and he never publicly
addressed himself to this problem. It would be interesting to know what
his theory of the fact was. Probably it would relate itself in some way
to his apprehension of the Messianic office.
As to the validity of the psychology of Jesus in reference to objective
reality, we are not here concerned to inquire.
In explaining Jesus' idea of God, there is no necessity for going
outside the bounds of history as recovered by modern scientific scholar-
ship. It is no explanation of the central feature of the psychology of
Jesus to say that he was a "unique religious genius," or that his doc-
trine of divinity was the issue of "revelation." The conventional appre-
hension of Jesus is most unsatisfactory. The mystical Christology of
the churches, at the one extreme, and the equally crass rationalism of
scholars like Renan, at the other, are obsolescent. When the higher
criticism of the Old Testament is completed, we shall see an evolution of
New Testament criticism which will, for the first time, supply a satis-
factory account of Jesus.
216 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Jesus teaching the doctrine of universal human broth-
erhood. If God were the loving Father of all, then all men
were neighbors and brothers regardless of tribalism and
nationality.
We have seen that the admission of the individual to
political rights, regardless of descent or of any previous
condition of servitude, had broken the power of the an-
cient family nobility. This was a tremendous revolution
over the politics which had prevailed in all societies from
the dawn of history. Its effect on the social mind was pro-
foundly democratic. The lower classes of the people saw
persons from their own ranks rising to positions of social
and political importance, and even into the councils of
nobles, kings, and emperors. Although the suffrage was
indeed usually hedged about with considerable property
qualifications, the new system, as compared with the older
system of descent, was only a step from the admission of
all men to political rights on the basis of manhood alone.
And this made the humble folk look up with new unrest
and new hope. The rights of the individual had been, so
to speak, legally suggested. Nevertheless, the rights of
the individual were not i secured unless he were wealthy.
The situation was paradoxical. The individual in the ab-
stract had rights; but only some individuals got rights in
the concrete.
This phase of the situation was also reflected in the
teaching of Jesus. If all men were brothers, and the sons
of a common Father, it must follow that all had a right to
the same consideration, even the least of the little ones.
But the sociology of human brotherhood was never fully
taught by Jesus. His relation to the political phase of
human life, through which alone the rights of the indi-
vidual are secured, is indefinite, and is well expressed by
his famous injunction to "render unto Caesar the things
that are Caesar's'' (Mark 12:17). He seems to have
avoided a delicate subject by a cleverly politic sentiment.
Jesus did not press the point. Perhaps the idea of man-
hood suffrage never occurred to him as a practicable thing.
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 217
If he had thought it necessary to his interpretation of the
kingdom, he would probably have said so, for his attitude
toward other matters proves that he did not lack courage.
The doctrines of human brotherhood and human
rights found practical expression in the so-called "golden
rule," which had been previously formulated by the Jew-
ish teacher Hillel and the Chinese teacher Confucius.
"Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even
so do ye also unto them; for this is the law and the
prophets" (Matthew 7 :12. Cf. ibid., 22 :40). According to
Jesus, the golden rule summarizes the secular aspect of
the kingdom.
In his interpretation of the kingdom Jesus comes to
close quarters with the vital subject of cleavage. In his
treatment of the relations between upper and lower
classes, and in his implied treatment of the subject of
property, he advances no new doctrine, and echoes the
cry of the older prophets. He approaches the social prob-
lem in the character of an individualist ; and no straining
of points can extract a properly social-organic doctrine
from his teaching. Certainly we do not find it in his con-
ception of human brotherhood. He treats the subject of
personal relations, righteousness, and justice, not from
the cosmic standpoint, but from the standpoint of individ-
ualism. "Woe unto you that are rich, and you that are
full!" he cries, denouncing the upper class indiscrimi-
nately (Luke 6 :24, 25). On the other hand, he commends
the lower class in like terms: "Blessed are ye poor,
for yours is the kingdom" (Luke 6:20). It is true
that in Matthew 5:3 the saying about the poor is
etherealized into "Blessed are the poor in spirit." But
whatever we do with the saying in Matthew, the ma-
terialistic edition in Luke remains; and it corresponds
with much of the teaching preserved in the three-fold
synoptic record upon which we depend largely (but not
wholly) for our conceptions of Jesus. According to Luke
18 : 24, 25, Jesus declares that they who are wealthy shall
hardly become members of the kingdom, and that it is
218 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
easier for a camel to go through a "needle's eje" than for a
rich man to enter the kingdom. According to Matthew 23
and Luke 20 :46, 47, the scribes and pharisees are de-
nounced as the head and center of the upper class, de-
vouring widows' houses, and neglecting the weightier mat-
ters of the law — judgment, mercy, and good faith. This
reminds us of the words of the prophets Isaiah and Micah,
in which they pronounce woe upon those who add house to
house and field to field, and sacrifice to Yahweh but neg-
lect mercy. It is plain that Jesus' interpretation of the
kingdom had little sympathy with the politico-material
hopes of the upper classes. The trend of his preaching, as
indicated by the quotations just made, favored the lower
social stratum as against the upper — not, indeed, by any
definite program, but in its general tendency, after the
manner of older prophets.
Consistently with this, we read, in Mark 12 :37, that
the "common people," or the "great multitude," heard him
gladly. And, of course, the upper class repaid his hos-
tility with interest. In Luke 19 :47, 48 we read : "And he
was teaching daily in the temple. And the chief priests
and scribes and principal men of the people sought to de-
stroy him ; but they could not find what they might do, for
the people all hung upon him listening" (Of. Luke 20:19).
In John 7 :48, 49 the pharisees inquire : "Hath any of the
rulers believed on him, or of the pharisees? But this mul-
titude [which follows him] which knoweth not the
[Mosaic] law are accursed." There are exceptions to most
rules ; and Jesus found a few friends among the well-to-do.
But, on the whole, the upper class was against him; and
the force of its opposition steadily increased.
Many people in modern times have thought that Jesus
either expressly or impliedly favored some positive scheme
of organic reform, such as socialism, or communism. But
the attempt to extract a social program from the gospel
records is unsuccessful. The gospels are saturated with
individualism. The times of Jesus could not produce a
man with a social program. The view that he had some
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 21^
organic measure in reserve misunderstands Jesus no less
than did the popular view which, in his own day, regarded
him as a candidate for the throne of Israel (John 6:15;
Matthew 20: 21).*
§ 132. — Jesus' thought about himself seems, on the
whole, to have been kept in the background. The ideal-
izing book of John represents him as declaring his Mes-
siahship to a Samaritan woman early in his ministry. But
the synoptics do not support this. His idea about himself
was evidently subsidiary in his own thought; and it must
have been so on the basis of any such message as that to
which the synoptics bear common witness. His humble
countrymen were attracted by his proclamation of the
kingdom, his delineation of the King, and his interpreta-
tion of the kingdom itself. They did not come out to hear
him talk about his own person. It was not until after his
execution that the legalistic idea of his person, as repre-
sented by the apostle Paul, took root in men's minds. We
* It is a hopeless task to try to understand Jesus apart from his
environment. We heartily endorse the judgment of Professor Lobstein,
as expressed in the following passage taken from his recent work on Prot-
estant dogmatics: "To isolate the Christ from the general evolution of
humanity — is not that to place him outside of humanity itself? Is not
that to condemn him and never to comprehend him?" Lobstein^ Intro-
duction to Protestant Dogmatics (Trans, by A. M. Smith, University of
Chicago Press, 1903), p. 263. Probably Professor Lobstein would not
endorse all of our positions in this connection. But the passage quoted
is profoundly significant.
There is pressing necessity for general treatment of religious evo-
lution in terms of modern thought. This has been accomplished only
in part by historical criticism of our sacred literature. If plans do not
miscarry, the treatment of the subject as found in the present work
is to be expanded into a larger volume entitled. The Psychology of the
Prophets: A Study in the Development of Religion as Illustrated in
the History of Israel and Christianity. The proposed work will under-
take to exhibit in detail the sociology of religion. Men generally have
yet to learn that it is possible to treat the subject in a scientific way
without impugning religion itself. Religious reality lies in the absolute
content of the so called "finite facts ;" and the religious interpretation of
life must be susceptible of expression within the terms of any propo-
sition about life that can be laid down and proved scientifically.
;220 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
cajinot imagine the historical Jesus preaching "Christ and
him crucified/' and teaching that salvation came through
faith in his name. This was a later and a necessary form
of Christianity. Jesus, however, was undoubtedly con-
vinced of his own unique relation to God. We have seen
that he put a moral-spiritual interpretation upon the
kingdom instead of the politico-material construction fa-
vored by the mass of the people in every social station. In
the same way, he regarded himself, not as a political King,
but as the suffering servant of Yahweh ; and the literature
of Israel gave no small warrant for this. His view of the
Messianic character was plainly contrary to that held by
most of his countrymen ; his immediate disciples were not
educated up to his view in his lifetime; and the diverg-
ence between the two conceptions became painfully appar-
ent at the last, when even the common people lost faith in
him.*
§ 133. — The preaching of Jesus evidently drew the
public attention that he desired. Probably there would
have been no upper-class opposition to him if he had sim-
ply confined himself to theology. But his treatment of the
kingdom on the secular side, especially as it touched the
delicate question of cleavage, was too much for the temper
of the aristocrats. It was the grandees of the higher social
stratum that plotted his death. It was the sanhedrim, the
legal citadel of Jewish aristocracy and monopoly, that
condemned him.
§ 134. — A short time after his execution, a few of the
disciples of Jesus became convinced that he had risen from
the dead; and that in the character of the long-expected
Messiah, he would presently return on the clouds of
* That the personality of Jesus was an important element in his
influence, not to be overlooked in an exhaustive scientific study of the
impression that he has made on the world, will be readily admitted. The
psychology of hero-worship, however, has not been given the attention
it deserves. The subject of personal relations in respect of leadership
and discipleship has not been fully worked out; and we must pass over
this item along with many others.
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 221
heaven to usher in the Golden Age.* This view was pro-
claimed by certain of the humble disciples and followers
of Jesus, who urged the Jews to accept him as the Mes-
siah. If the Gentiles would participate in the felicities of
the Golden Age, they must first be circumcised and be-
come Jews.
In considering the early history of Christianity, we^
must bear in mind that the terrible economic oppression
of the vast lower class was manifest everywhere; and that
the earlier disciples of Jesus were drawn mostly from the
lower class. In preaching the resurrection and Messiah-
ship of Jesus, and his prompt return on the clouds to es-
tablish the Golden Age, the disciples thought they had a
remedy for the troubles of the times. They succeeded in
raising a disturbance on the streets of Jerusalem, and in
converting a few Jew^s to their way of thinking. But in
view of subsequent history, it is plain that Jewish Chris-
tianity could not have become a world-religion. The his-
torical career of Christianity has been a Gentile, not a
Jewish, career. The Jews have never accepted Jesus as.
the Messiah ; and it is a very significant fact that the orig-
inal disciples of Jesus, who had been most with him, did
not succeed in their enterprise.
§ 135. — It was not Jewish Christianity, then, that
triumphed. The great Gentile world outside of Judaism
was brought to Christianity, not by the preaching of the
original disciples of Jesus, but by Paul, "the apostle to the
Gentiles," as he is indeed rightly called.
Paul was a Jew by birth and education; and he at
first bore an active part in the persecution of the Jewish
Christians. His life and letters reveal a man who could
have done a thing of this kind only as a result of the most
intense conviction. He had been trying to practice right-
eousness, and escape the chill underworld of "death," by
the strictest adherence to "the law of Moses" as elaborated
* It seems impossible at this point for us to give the same render-
ing of the history as that which is found in the gospel accounts.
222 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
by Judaism. His contact with the Jewish Christian move-
ment, in the character of persecutor, "breathing out
threatenings and slaughter,'^ seems to have brought to a
sudden culmination a process that had been going for-
ward in his mind (Cf. Romans 7). This he could only in-
terpret, after the habit of his age, as a supernatural turn-
ing about. Paul was a man given to visions and revela-
tions, whether in the body or out of the body he could not
tell ; and the risen Jesus, he thought, appeared to him in a
vision as he had appeared to the earlier disciples.
§ 136. — It became apparent to Paul that the earlier
system of righteousness by works imposed upon men a
greater burden than they could bear ; that Jesus had come
as the suffering Messiah, or Christ, to do away with the
law of Moses forever by his sacrificial death; and that
righteousness and justification were consequently to be
attained by faith in Jesus Christ and practice of his teach-
ings rather than through the mechanical works of the law.
As a consequence of his apprehension of Jesus, Paul de-
clared that physical circumcision, the symbol of Judaism
and the law, was abolished; and that the entire Gentile
world might now become a part of the spiritual Israel by
circumcision of the heart. Paul's liberal attitude with
reference to the law of Moses was not peculiar to himself.
We know now that the Jews of the Dispersion were di-
vided into two parties, whereof one was liberal, and re-
jected the rite of circumcision and other ceremonies (17).
Liberal Judaism, however, did not, like Paul, have Jesus
behind it ; and it was the genius of Paul that incorporated
this Jewish liberalism into Christianity. As might be ex-
pected, Paul's ideas in their external aspect are some-
what burdened with many of the absurdities of primitive
thought ; but their substance is philosophically sound.
In their essentials there was no difference between
Paulist Christianity and the Jewish Christianity of the
original disciples; but Paul's expression of Christianity
t
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 223
was superior to that of the original disciples, and more
accurately represents the spirit of Jesus himself.*
In their external machinery, especially in regard to
the rite of circumcision, Paulinism and Jewish Christian-
ity were, however, in conflict. The sound of this conflict
reverberates in the letters of Paul ; but presently his form
of the gospel triumphed in the great Gentile world. After
he had accomplished his work, two of the foremost of
Jesus' original disciples left the oriental world and their
exclusive mission to the Jews, and came over into the cen-
ter of classic civilization. John at Ephesus, and Peter at
Kome, entered into the labors of him they had at first op-
posed. This movement is a typical manifestation of hu-
man nature; and it signifies the early closure of the con-
troversy. In later years, when the opposition between the
two parties had subsided, the first history of the Christian
Church was written. In that book, which is known as
^The Acts of the Apostles," Peter appears as an early lib-
eral, being converted by a vision of a great sheet let down
from heaven ; and the Paul of the Acts is a very different
man from the same person as he appears in his own letters.
This difference, however, is to be accounted for, not as the
issue of a deliberate "tendency,'' as not a few modern
scholars have claimed, but as a result of the changed
standpoint of the more harmonious Christian times in
which the book of Acts was put into its present shape.
This may be otherwise expressed by saying that Acts is
true in spirit, but not in letter. It is a monument, not to
early Christian discord, but to early Christian har-
mony (18).
§ 137. — And now we come to what is, in the present
connection, the most delicate and vitally important point
in the rise of Christianity. We saw that the struggle of
the Old Testament prophets to solve the social problem is-
sued, not in social reform, but in the old social cleavage.
* Some scholars have regarded Paul as the real founder of Chris-
tianity, and Jesus as a much smaller man than the apostle to the Gentiles ;
but this, we think, is a critical aberration.
224 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
In the same way, the efforts of the New Testament proph-
ets were at length frustrated on the phenomenal, or secu-
lar, side. We shall now examine how Christianity articu-
lated itself with cleavage, and became a state institution,,
differing not in its externals from any other state religion.
Passing from the Jesus of the Synoptics to Paul, the
student of cleavage is at once conscious of a changed at-
mosphere in w^hich a sociological barometer indicates the
inevitable transformation. Paul concreted Christianity
as a movement in history ; but, paradoxically, the demand
for righteousness becomes more abstract in him than in
Jesus. Jesus instinctively arrayed the lower class against
the upper; and the upper class responded by putting him
to death. But in Paul we note the absence of that strong
hostility against the upper class which is manifest in
Jesus. Paul does not go about crying, "Woe unto you
rich!'' and, "Blessed are you poor!'' and, "A rich man
shall hardly enter the kingdom!" Paul can make his way
anywhere in the Koman world without setting the classes
against each other. Could a gospel, he argued, which pro-
claimed the brotherhood of all men bar out the well-to-do
and the rich if they chose to come in? It is true that
Christianity, even as represented by the courtly Paul, ap-
pealed at first with vastly more force and success to
the lower class than to the upper. A gospel which
promised the speedy return from heaven of a Christ
who should avenge his own elect, and which guar-
anteed a life of eternal bliss beyond the grave, nat-
urally at first attracted the less fortunate in greater
numbers than the more fortunate. But this was not Paul's
intention. Looking out over the great world, the apostle
to the Gentiles declared that the church ought to include
everybody — Jew and Greek, barbarian and Scythian,
slave and freeman, male and female (Colossians 3 :11 ; Ga-
latians 3 :28 ; 1 Corinthians 12 :13). Where Jesus at least
approached the problem of cleavage in a concrete way^
Paul avoids the subject.
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 225
Christianity spread at first mostly in the cities. Writ-
ing about A. D. 50 to his converts in Corinth, a represent-
ative city of the Empire, Paul reminds them that "not
many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many
noble" were among them (1 Corinthians 1 : 26). As Pro-
fessor McGiffert observes, the Christian victims of the
Neronian persecution of 64 a. d. were evidently from the
lowest classes of society, or the emperor would not have
dared to treat them as he did (19). As we have many
times remarked, the lower class included slaves and poor
freemen. The apostolic church evidently drew a large
part of its membership from the personally enslaved lower
class as well as from the personally free lower class. In
Ephesians 6:5, 8, the writer issues the following injunc-
tion to Christian bondservants : "Slaves, be obedient unto
them that according to the flesh are your lords, knowing
that whatsoever good thing each one doeth, the same shall
he receive again from the Lord, whether he be a slave or a
freeman."* In Colossians 3:22 we read: "Slaves, obey
in all things them that are your lords according to the
flesh." In 1 Timothy 6:1: "Let as many as are slaves
under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all
honor." In Titus 2 :9 : "Exhort slaves to be in subjection
to their own masters, and to be well pleasing in all things,
not gainsaying, not purloining, but showing all good fidel-
ity." In the letter to Philemon we see Paul returning a
* The King James Bible uses the word "servants" for the term here
freely rendered "slaves." On the other hand, as the men who produced
the Revised English Bible say in the margin, the word which their prede-
cessors had translated "servants" is more accurately rendered "bond-
servants." It ought to be manifest, surely, that the passage here quoted
should commence with a term like "bondservant," or "slave," implying
ownership by an economic superior, in order to consist intelligibly with
the conclusion of the passage, which even the King James translators
could not escape rendering "bond or free." Allowance ought, perhaps,
to be made in their favor in view of the fact that the word "servant"
carried a lower implication in the seventeenth century than it has now;
but there is no excuse for using their translation ?t the present time.
15
AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
fugitive Christian slave to his owner, saying that he
thought the slave had wronged the master in running
away. Another testimony to the presence of the poor in
the early church is found in the anxiety for collections of
money. The apostle to the Gentiles tells us that at the
conclusion of the famous Jerusalem conference, the "pil-
lar apostles," Peter, James, and John, gave to him and
Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that Paul and his
companion should go to the Gentiles, and they to the cir-
cumcision, adding, "only they would that we should re-
member the poor, which very thing I was also zealous to
do" (Galatians 2:10). The collections taken were used,
not for the poor in the non-Christian world outside the
church, but especially for them that were of the "house-
hold of faith," the "poor saints," and the "poor brethren."
But if the church at first consisted principally of poor
freemen and slaves, it included an increasing proportion
of more fortunate people — the rich : the slaveholders and
the landowners. The master Philemon, to whom Paul re-
turned the fugitive bondservant, was a beloved fellow-
worker in the gospel, and a member of a church that met
in his own house. As we have already observed, there was
really nothing to keep such people out. The older relig-
ions were collapsing by this time. People were ceasing to
believe them, or to find any comfort in them ; and Pauline
Christianity, with the novel background of Judaism, was
well fitted to replace them. The little churches, composed
principally of slaves and poor freemen, who met in pri-
vate houses, gladly welcomed into their brotherhood strag-
glers like Philemon from the more fortunate classes, who
contributed from their wealth to the needs of the new
movement. In 1 Timothy 6:2, Paul indirectly speaks of
early Christian slaveholders when he exhorts Christian
slaves not to despise "believing masters," because these
masters are brothers in Christ. In Ephesians 6 :9, Chris-
tian masters are commanded to treat their slaves well.
Similarly, in Colossians 4:1, we read : "Lords, render
unto your slaves that which is just and equal." Thus it is
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 227
evident that the upper classes began to be "converted,"
and to "join the Church" in growing numbers. Indeed be-
fore the close of the first century of the Christian era one
Christian writer thought it well to sound a note of warn-
ing against the favor shown by the church to the wealthy.
This writer's composition has come down to us under the
title, "The General Epistle of James." His letter was
written late in the century — probably about 90 A. d. (20).
When reading the passage herewith reproduced, we should
bear in mind that it occurs in a letter which does duty, not
as a local and special writing, but as a general epistle :
"My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus
Christ with respect of persons. For if there come into
your assembly a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing,
and there come in also a poor man in vile clothing ; and ye
have regard to him that weareth the fine clothing, and say,
Sit thou here in a good place ; and ye say to the poor man,
Stand thou there, or sit under my footstool; are ye not
divided among yourselves, and become judges with evil
thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren; did not God
ehoose them that are poor as to the world to be rich in
faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to them
that love him? But ye have dishonored the poor man. Do
not the rich oppress you, and themselves drag you before
the judgment-seats?" (James 2 : 1-6).
We learn from the testimony of the Church Fathers
that in the second century the larger part of the Church
was still recruited from the uneducated, humbler class
(21). But the second and third centuries marked the
steadily decreasing influence of the lower class, and the
corresponding growth of aristocratic tendencies in the
Church. The rich multiplied their offerings; and it be-
<?ame not infrequent for the wealthy, upon their decease,
to leave property to the Church by will. Gifts and lega-
cies at first assumed the form of money and other wealth.
But more and more the possessions of the Church em-
braced landed property. Gibbon has indicated conditions
in the third Christian century in the following sentence:
228 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
"Before the close of the third century, many consid-
erable estates were conferred on the opulent churches of
Kome, Milan, Carthage, Antioch, Alexandria, and the
other great cities of Italy and the provinces" (22).
Kespecting the early years of the fourth century, Hal-
lam writes :
"It was among the first effects of the conversion of
[the emperor] Constantine to give, not only a security, but
a legal sanction to the territorial acquisitions of the
church. The edict of Milan, 313, recognizes the actual es-
tates of the ecclesiastical corporations. Another, pub-
lished in 321, grants to all the subjects of the empire the
power of bequeathing their property to the church. His
own liberality and that of his successors set an example
which did not want imitators'' (23).
The spread of Christianity through the upper stratum
is interestingly shown by the fortieth and forty-first can-
ons of the Synod of Elvira, which was held about the year
305. It was declared that the Christian landlord ought
not to permit his pagan tenants to pay rents in kind if
these products — for instance, flesh and vegetables — had
been previously offered to idols; and that the Christian
master ought not to permit pagan slaves to keep idols on
his property (24).
It is plain that between the first and fifth centuries a
mighty change was wrought. At the former date the
Church consisted of small bodies of obscure people, with
no comprehensive organization and no regularly ap-
pointed leaders. At the latter date we find it with wholly
changed fortunes, a state institution, drawing its mem-
bership from upper and lower classes, divided sharply into
laity and clergy, its higher officers holding great estates
of landed and movable property, and assimilated with the
secular upper class. In short, the primitive groups of
Christians had been transformed into a powerful social
engine — the Eoman Catholic Church — whereof we shall
see more in our survey of western civilization (25).
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 229
§ 138. — Keligious conditions in the fifth century have
been so well depicted by Professor Dill in his work on the
Koman society of this period that we quote him :
"The line between Christian and pagan was long wav-
ering and uncertain. We find adherents of the opposing
creeds side by side even in the same family at the end of
the fourth century. . . . Anyone acquainted with the
life of St. Jerome will remember Paula, the great Roman
lady, who was the aristocratic leader of the exodus to the
Holy Places. She gave up all her vast wealth to maintain
the religious houses which she founded at Bethlehem.
Her whole soul was absorbed in the study of the Scrip-
tures, and in the thought of the life to come. Yet Paula
was united in early youth to a noble named Julius Toxo-
tius, who boasted of his descent from Aeneas, and who re-
fused to abandon the worship of his ancestors. Their son,
the younger Toxotius, who, at any rate in his youth, was
also a staunch pagan, was married to Laeta, another de-
voted friend of St. Jerome, to whom he addressed a letter
on the proper education for a Christian maiden. Laeta
herself was the offspring of a mixed marriage. Her
mother was a Christian, and her father was one of the
most distinguished chiefs of the pagan aristocracy, Publi-
lius Caeonius Albinus. The affectionate relations of this
household seem to have been quite undisturbed by the dif-
ference of creed among its members. St. Jerome speaks of
Albinus in a friendly tone as a most learned and disting-
uished man, and sketches a pleasant picture of the old
heathen pontiff listening to his granddaughter singing her
infant hymns to Christ. . . In general society the
cultivated skeptic or pagan appears to have often main-
tained a friendly intimacy even with the most uncompro-
mising champions of the church. The correspondence of
St. Augustine reveals the singular freedom and candor
with which the great religious questions of the time were
debated between the cultivated members of the two par-
ties" (26).
230 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
After an ineffectual attempt to remedy the evils grow-
ing out of the social problem, Christianity thus turns its
head toward the clouds, and "stands gazing up into
heaven,'' without closely studying the real course of
events on the earth.
§ 139. — The growing worldliness of the Church pro-
duced a reaction which issued in another institution of re-
ligion. Persons disgusted with the world went into the
deserts and country places to live a holy life. Such were
called "monks." But these, too, obeyed the powerful col-
lective impulse. They associated in growing numbers ; ac-
cepted endowments from wealthy Christians; and in time
the Church adopted monasticism as one branch of its or-
ganization.
§140. — As the Church extended its power and per-
fected its machinery, society continued steadily to decline.
In the fifth century after the birth of Christ, the Empire
collapsed in its ancient seat; and the barbarian tribes
came into control of all the West. In Greece and the East,
the Koman power, indeed, lived on for a time; but that
part of the world, as the issue proved, no longer lay in the
main path of human progress.
The center of historical interest, having shifted from
the eastern to the northern seaboard of the Mediterra-
nean, passes now into western Europe as whole. Here a
third great civilization emerges from savagery and bar-
barism, assimilates the achievements of its predecessors^
makes original contributions to progress, and assumes the
leadership of the world.
(1)— Thucydides, History (Boston, 1883. Jowett's trans.), pp. 1-2.
(2)— Cf. Hall, The Oldest Civilization of Greece (London, 1901),
p. 20. Cf. RiDGEWAY, The Early Age of Greece (Cambridge, 1901), chaps.
1 and 2.
(3)— DuNCKER, History of Greece (Lonlon, 1886. Alleyne and
Abbott's trans.), H, pp. 119, 138, 312. Cf. Grote, History of Greece
(N. Y., 1875) Pt. 2, chap. 9. Cf. Duruy, History of Greece (London,
1898), I, chap. 5. Cf. Mommsen, History of Rome (N. Y., Dickson's
trans.), I, p. 80.
[
CLASSIC CIVILIZATION. 231
(4) — Cf. DuNCKER, History of Greece, II, pp. 5-15.
(5)— MoMMSEN, History of Rome, I, pp. 261, 262.
(6)— Idem, I, p. 111.
(7)— CuRTius, History of Greece (N. Y., 1875), I, p. 339.
(8)— DUNCKER, II, p. 319.
(9)— Abbott, History of Greece (N. Y., 1888), I, p. 367.
(10) — MoMMSEN, I, pp. 370, 371. Cf. Ramsey and Lanciani, Ro-
man Antiquities (London, 1894), p. 91. Cf. Morgan, Ancient Society
(N. Y., 1878), pp. 215-343.
(11) — Mahaffy, Problems in Greek History (London, 1892), pp.
16, 88. Cf. ScHOMAN, Antiquities of Greece (London, 1880. Hardy and
Mann's trans.), p. 347.
(12) — Merivale, History of the Romans under the Empire (N. Y.,
1889), VII, p. 484. On class relations in Greece and Italy generally, see
the following: Gilbert, Greek Constitutional Antiquities (London,
1895, Brooks and Nicklin's trans.), p. 170-200. Ramsey and
Lanciani, Roman Antiquities (London, 1894), chaps. 2 and 3,
ScHOMAN, Antiquities of Greece, Part 1, chap. 4; Part 2,
chaps. 3 and 4. Mahaffy, Social Life in Greece (London, 1892), Chap.
9. Blumner, Home Life of the Ancient Greeks (London, 1893), Chap.
15. GuHL AND Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans (London, 1880),
p. 509. Cox, Greek Statesmen (N. Y., 1885-6), passim. Simcox, Ora-
tions of Demosthenes, etc. (Oxford, 1872), XXV.
(13) — Cf. Dill, Roman Society in the Fifth Century, a. d., (Lon-
don, 1899), pp. 138, 139.
(14)— Peabody, Jesus Christ and the Social Question (N. Y., 1901),
p. 229.
(15) — Cf. Schurer, The Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ,
passim.
■ (16)— Bruce, Apologetics (N. Y., 1899), p. 177.
(17) — Friedlander, in Jewish Quarterly Review, Jan., 1902.
(18)— Cf. Ramsay, St. Paul, the Traveller (N. Y., 1898), pp. 19,
20. Cf. McGiFFERT, History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age (N. Y.,
1900), pp. 172, 173.
(19)— Cf. McGiFFERT, ibid., p. 629. Cf. Fisher, History of the
Christian Church (N. Y., 1894), pp. 34, 35, 39.
(20)— Bacon, Introduction to the New Testament (N. Y., 1902),
p. 165. Cf. McGiFFERT, The Apostolic Age, p. 581.
(21)— Fisher, History of Christian Doctrine (N. Y., 1899), p. 52.
(22)— Gibbon, Decline of the Roman Empire (N. Y., Harper, 1900),
chap. 15, p. 134.
(23) — Hallam, Europe in the Middle Ages, chap. 7. Cf. Milman,
History of Latin Christianity (N. Y., 1889), I, pp. 507-511, 536.
(24)— Hefele, History of the Church Councils (Edinburg, 1883.
Clark's trans.), I, p. 154. Cf. pp. 424-426; II, pp. 186, 301, 306; III, p.
169. Cf. Lea, Yale Review (New Haven), II, p. 356.
(25) — For passages on the influence and functions of the Church
in the last century of the "Western Empire, cf. Dill, p. 215. Kitchin,
History of France (Oxford, 1873), I, pp. 64, 65,
(26)— Dill, pp. 13, 14.
CHAPTER VII.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
§ 141. — The social development of western civiliza-
tion began on the same level as that of the oriental and
classic worlds. In the background of the history of our
great modern states is the shifting scene of tribal migra-
tion and war. A passage from Strabo, a Greek geographer
who lived at about the beginning of the Christian era,
gives an interesting view of barbaric Germany, from
whose forests issued the tribes that finally overwhelmed
the western Roman Empire:
"Common to all the inhabitants of this land is their
readiness to migrate — a consequence of the simplicity of
their mode of life, their ignorance of agriculture in the
proper sense, and their custom, instead of laying in stores
of provisions, of living in huts and providing only for the
needs of the day. They derive most of their food from
their cattle, like the Nomads; and imitating them they
load their goods and furniture on wagons, and move with
their cattle wherever they like" (1).
In the fifth century after Christ a host of barbarians
came pouring out of the German forests. This movement
was caused partly by the increase of a population which
was unable to extract subsistence from its home territory
on the capitalistic basis then prevailing, and partly by the
pressure of outlying tribes from eastern Europe and Asia.
It was plainly a mere involution of the vast cosmic pro-
cess that underlies all history. Everywhere that Rome
had ruled in western Europe her power was overthrown;
and the barbarian flood rose to high tide. In Britain the
Angles and Saxons, and later the Normans, established
themselves. On the soil of Gaul, or France, and reaching
232
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 233
back into Germany, the Franks became the dominant race.
In Italy the Lombards, and in Spain the Visigoths, took
possession.*
§ 142. — At the historical beginning of western civili-
zation we read everywhere the old story of advance from
the nomadic to the settled life ; of the drawing together of
men into social bodies of increasing size; of the mingling
of conquerors and conquered; and of the stratifl-ca-
tion of society into two principal classes, upper and lower.
It is plain that cleavage in western civilization, as in the
oriental and classic worlds, did not commence in the full
daylight of history. Tacitus and Gsesar show that it had
begun within the tribes at an early period, long before the
fall of the Empire (3).
§ 143. — Brought actively to the front during the
early wars, the upper class consisted at first of a mili-
tary, landholding nobility divided into clans, or gens, like
the original aristocracies of the oriental and classic civil-
izations. And, as in these earlier communities, the clan
nobility constituted the State, and wielded the power of
society in its corporate capacity.
But this nobility soon added to itself another element.
By the "conversion'' of the barbarians to Christianity, the
Eoman Catholic Church was extended from its home in
Italy throughout all the communities of western Europe.
Everywhere lavish grants of land were made by no-
bles and kings to the bishops and the monastic orders
(4). In England, the nobility made generous provision for
* In tracing the growth of western civilization, we shall consider
the subject mainly, but not exclusively, from the standpoint of English
history. There are three reasons for this : The evolution of England
illustrates, and eventually becomes the pattern for, the development of
modern civilization; the literary sources of English history surpass those
of the other European countries; and, last but not least, our space is
limited. With reference to the sources, Professor Gross observes:
*'Owing mainly to the blessings of insularity, and to the absence of
violent domestic revolutions, the national archives of England are older,
richer, more continuous, and more nearly complete than those of any
other European nation" (2).
234 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the Church. The country had not yet been united into a
nation; and bishoprics were established in each tribal
kingdom (5). The clergy subsisted upon the produce of
their own local estates; while some of their lands
were leased for payments in kind, in personal service, or in
money — although not much of the latter was in circula-
tion as yet. It is estimated that after the Norman Con-
quest in the eleventh century, the ecclesiastical nobility
held thirty per cent, of the cultivated soil (6). Thus, the
Church system, with its aristocratic constitution, passed
over entire into the life of the young states that took the
place of Kome in western Europe.
Keligious ministration consumed a relatively small
part of the activities of the Church; and the priesthood
occupied, in fact, the same large place that the ecclesiasti-
cal wing of the upper stratum had held in the older civili-
zations. The churchly nobility conserved the knowledge
acquired by the ancient world; and furnished the secular
nobility with civil administrators. In the upgrowth of
western civilization, the Roman Catholic Church was
nothing less than a power of the first magnitude. It is
difficult for us to realize that period in which the Church
was the representative at once "of politics, legal knowl-
edge, diplomacy, education, literature, and much more be-
sides; a period in which the clergy were not only father
confessors, but belonged to the state as chancellors, treas-
urers, ambassadors, justices, clerks of the court, barris-
ters, attornies, physicians, accountants, and secreta-
ries" (7).
Thus, the upper class consisted of two sections. The
ecclesiastical wing was known as the "First Estate;" the
secular nobility, as the "Second Estate." But we must
not be confused by names and forms. We must bear in
mind that, sociologically, the First and Second Estates
were not independent bodies. They composed a single up-
per stratum, which absorbed a large portion of the labor
products of the lower class, attracted the best intellect.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 235
and gave practical expression to all the forces of social
development.
§ 144. — Below this composite upper order lay the
great lower class in a legal condition which, with excep-
tions presently to be noted, is broadly described under the
name of serfdom, or serf-slavery. The serf was, according
to law, compelled to remain on the land of his lord, who,
as we have seen, might be either a secular or an ecclesiasti-
cal noble. Occupying a stated assignment of the soil on
some great estate, and living in his own little hut, the serf
must give to his lord a portion of his labor products, and,
for a part of the time, put his labor at the disposal of the
same superior authority. Both of these conditions, of
course, amounted to essentially the same thing — upper-
class control of lower-class labor without direct economic
repayment. Broadly speaking, this was the condition of
the bulk of the lower class throughout Europe for many
centuries after the fall of the Empire. The status of the
masses naturally varied within certain limits, and at dif-
ferent places and times. Some of the peasantry could al-
most be called free. But, as Vinogradoff observes respect-
ing mediaeval English conditions, "it would be difficult to
speak of free peasantry in the modern sense. . . Some
kind or form of dependence often clings even to those who
occupy the best place among the villagers as recognized
free tenants, and in most cases we have a strong infusion
of subjection in the life of otherwise privileged peasants''
(8). It would be wearisome to linger over the details of
the lower-class constitution. Suffice it to say that the
mass of the community occupied an inferior position with
reference to the great landholding order — a smaller part
of the lower class consisting of tenants, who paid a stated
rent, and were otherwise practically free; the larger part
consisting of serfs (9).
§ 145. — Notwithstanding the legal fixedness of the
lower class, it is a mistake to suppose that labor was im-
movable in the Middle Age. Although the serf might not
of his own will depart from the soil whereon he was born,
236 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
he could be moved by his lord from one estate to another,
or from agricultural to manufacturing work (10). Again,
a lord could send into a foreign country, and purchase
from some other lord the services of desirable workmen.
Benedict Biscop, Abbott of Wearmouth Monastery,
brought workmen from beyond the sea ( 11). King Alfred
the Great did the same (12). Charlemagne sent for labor-
ers from foreign parts (13). King John ordered iron-
smelters to be sent from Durham, England, over into Ire-
land (14).
§ 146. — It should also be noted that in western soci-
ety, as in the oriental and classic worlds, there were no
impassible barriers between upper and lower classes.
Many roads were open to the ascent of ability. "Great
facilities for rising from class to class in the social order,"
says Professor Stubbs, "are not at all inconsistent with
very strong class jealousies and antipathies and broad
lines of demarkation" (15). Modes of advance in the eco-
nomic world will become evident as we proceed. Mean-
while the following passage from Kogers can hardly be
omitted :
"All the prospects which the Church offered . . .
were open in effect to the mass of the people. . . The
son of a villain [serf] could, if fortune, or merit . .
favored him, reach from the hut of his parents to the mitre
of a parliamentary abbott, to the crozier of the bishop, to
the custody of the great seal, to the wand of the lord high
treasurer, to the princely state of the Koman Cardinal.
Fox, the founder of Corpus Christi College in Oxford, is
said to have left his home at an early age in order to be
trained for the Church, and on journeying down some
time afterward to Lincolnshire, to have told his parents,
when they wished him to stay with them, that their home-
stead would not serve for the kitchen of the house that he
was building for himself. Never perhaps in the social his-
tory of nations was there so great an opportunity for ca-
pacity to rise by acknowledged roads to dignity" (16).
\
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 237
§ 147. — It required about one thousand years — from
the fifth to the sixteenth century — for the development
of the barbarian tribes into a community stable and civil-
ized enough to take up the work of progress which had
been laid down by classic civilization. This period of
preparation we now call "The Middle Age," since it lies
between ancient and modern history. It was the birth
time of the great nations of today. The Middle Age itself
may be reviewed in two divisions of five hundred years
each — the Dark Age, and the Age of. Awakening.
In the Dark Age, extending, say, from the fifth to the
eleventh century, western Europe was on a primitive, ag-
ricultural basis. No large manufacturing industries had
sprung up. Production was of a simple and primitive
character, and mostly for local consumption. These con-
ditions alone would have prevented extensive commerce;
and others operated in the same direction. It was dif-
ficult for people to discover each others wants and prod-
ucts. Movable wealth was insecure. Traveling in the open
country was unsafe. Means of transportation and com-
munication were exceedingly primitive. There was but
little money in circulation. There were no strong and
permanently established governments with wide jurisdic-
tions (17).
In the Age of Awakening, which extended, say, from
the tenth to the sixteenth century, the picture is brighter.
Progress of a most substantial kind raised western Eu-
rope to a position from which, moving outward into mod-
ern history, it could take up in earnest the work of de-
velopment where the ancient civilizations had stopped.
Governments with wider jurisdictions were formed. Law
and order were established more securely and uniformly.
Multiplying international treaties, and the steady pres-
sure of the universal Church, along with other influences,
paved the way for a growing cosmopolitanism. The study
of old manuscripts and books revived the learning of the
ancients. Manners were softened. Commerce and man-
ufactures reached an extensive development; and the in-
238 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
creasing circulation of money diminished the area of prim-
itive barter.
§ 148. — In the old Saxon Dialogs, the merchant says
that he brings home "skins, silks, costly gems and gold,
various garments, pigments, wine, oil, ivory, orichalcus,
copper and tin, silver, glass and such like" (18).
It has been observed that this passage is a good illus-
tration of the fact (already twice brought out by the pres-
ent inquiry) that trade as an independent occupation first
arises in the service of the upper class (19). It is well to
notice this fact again, since we are dealing with condi-
tions more fully in the light of history, and leading up
through a straighter path to the society in which we live.
Throughout western Europe in the second half of the
Middle Age a merchant class gradually arose to engineer
trade, and to make itself a power in the community. It
became known as the "Third Estate." But names are
often misleading; and just as the First and Second Es-
tates composed what was in effect a single upper stratum,
,«o the Third Estate was a development of the upper class
under a new form.
The origin of the Third Estate must be sought in ages
in which it had no existence as a class. The lay or eccle-
siastical noble was too much absorbed in large business to
exercise detailed oversight of the great throngs of humble
folk on his estates. His lands were often widely scat-
tered in different parts of the country (20); and it was
necessary for him to have a staff of managers, bailiffs, or
stewards, to superintend his affairs. These persons were
in serfdom; and they reached their positions by proved
fitness. It was one of the functions of such men to super-
intend the exchange of surplus products for goods from
other localities. Thus, the formation of a servile, or un-
free, merchant class precedes the rise of a free merchant
•class.
Aside from the proprietor himself, the steward was
the most important man on the estate. He enjoyed the
confidence of his lord. He was favored over the other
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 239
lower-class folk in proportion to his importance. As a
stimulus to the best performance of his duties he was per-
mitted to retain a part of the goods that passed through
his hands. In this way he might accumulate considerable
wealth, which the law guarded from arbitrary seizure.
When money came into use, the property accumulated by
favored serfs took the form of cash, or could be exchanged
for cash.
At the next step in this process, the lord of the es-
tate, becoming pressed for ready money, permits the
thrifty serf to buy his personal freedom, giving him a quit-
claim charter as evidence of his new position in life. The
following passage gives a case in point. The nobleman is
Bishop Swinfield. The serf is Robert Crul. The time is
1302:
"Robert Crul was a bailiff upon one of the farms of
the bishop's manor of Ross. He was a ^villien regardant,'
with a mother, wife, and children living with him. In
1302, by a solemn deed, he was manumitted by the bishop ;
and ^Robert Crul, of Hamme, and Matilda his wife, with
all his offspring begotten and to be begotten, together with
all his goods holden and to be holden,' was rendered ^for-
ever free and quit from all yoke of servitude' ....
Robert Crul, by his industry in the service of the bishop,
was enabled to buy his freedom for forty marks, and he
became the founder of two honorable families. This
power of rising, however slowly and painfully, out of the
condition in which they were born, . . . was, no
doubt, the sustaining hope of many of the more frugal,
diligent and intelligent villans of that age" (21).
After his enfranchizement, a man like Robert Crul
could re-enter the service of his former owner, or the em-
ployment of some other nobleman, and manage his trade
for him. Or he could contract to superintend the com-
merce of several estates, or of an entire locality.
The merchant class operated for several centuries un-
der monopolistic privileges granted by the nobility; grew
240 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
rich by retaining commissions on the goods that passed
through their hands ; and bought landed estates.
The purchase of land clearly marked the entrance of a
wealthy merchant into the upper class ; and in many such
cases a title of nobility was granted by the king (22).
§ 149. — With the expansion of commerce and the rise
of the merchant class there grew silently up amidst the
old, agricultural economy, with its peasant huts and
lordly castles, a new economy of towns and cities. In the
Middle Age, trade could not go on continuously, as today.
Its beginnings were hampered, as we have learned, by
p great obstacles. Population was dispersed; traveling in
the open country was unsafe ; and people had difficulty in
discovering each others wants and products. Under such
conditions, the legal establishment of markets and fairs
was an incalculable social benefit. "Unless traders were
brought together at definite centers at definite times," re-
marks Professor Ashley, "it was impossible either to pro-
tect them, or to supervise their dealings in the interest of
the consumer, or to obtain from them those payments
which formed a considerable part of the royal revenue.
Hence the policy of the government was to create for
trade regular channels within which it might be compelled
to move'' (23). From this standpoint, mediaeval towns and
cities have been well and simply defined as privileged
places where markets were held (24). The new centers of
population grew up at convenient points — near fortified
stations, monasteries, and churches, on rivers, and along
the sea-coast. One of the most interesting features of life
in that age is the selling of charters to the towns by the
lay and ecclesiastical nobility of the territories whereon
the towns arose (25).
§ 150. — Increased exchange of wealth was associated
with increased production of wealth. In order to examine
the growth of manufactures and of industrial capitalism
it will be necessary once more to retrace our steps.
Social development, in its beginnings as well as in
later stages, depends upon material industry. But Indus-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 241
try as we think of it today, in its highly organized form,
had no existence in the earlier historic stages of social
evolution. In early times, the material needs of associ-
ated men were small as compared with other social needs.
Upper-class appropriations, although partly converted
into industrial capital, were more largely consumed in the
immediate personal support of the upper orders during
their discharge of non-industrial functions. The extensive
growth of manufactures and commerce waits always upon
the organization of social stability over wide areas. In
the three great circles of communities (oriental, classic,
and w^estern) which have thus far come before us, we have
seen how stability was organized out of savagery and bar-
barism, under the forms of the Clan State, by the forces
of social cleavage. In surveying the first two of these, we
passed rather hurriedly over industry and commerce, giv-
ing more attention to other aspects of the subject. But in
western civilization the industrial phase of life has ac-
quired an importance hitherto unknown — in large part,
as we must apparently believe, because the energies of
western society have been released from the mighty task of
intellectual beginnings by its rich inheritance from its
predecessors. The principle of cleavage, having been a
powerful factor in the earlier development of society, has
actively operated in the evolution of the vast industrial
plant existing around us today.
§ 151. — We have seen that in the confusion of the
wars, migrations, and settlements during the first half of
the Middle Age the community existed on an agricultural
basis. In the midst of these conditions the beginnings of
manufactures and of industrial capital are to be found on
the estates of the secular and ecclesiastical nobility (26).
It was only here that industrial capital could begin to ac-
cumulate in large quantities. This general truth needs to
be emphasized. Manufacture, like commerce, has not
grown up out of prehistoric animality in self-centered in-
dependence, manned by free workers who have saved their
16
242 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
own capital. The upper class has not been a mere para-
sitic burden upon the development of industry; and, as
already observed, the whole subject of manufactures and
commerce must be approached from the standpoint of
cleavage.
At first the handicraftsman w^as also an agricultural
worker. The pursuits of agriculture involved the use of
implements, clothes, and various buildings. These things
were, for a time, sufftciently provided by temporary drafts
upon the regular field hands. Such temporary handi-
craftsmen were chosen from those that showed the most
proficiency in mechanical pursuits.
But along with the increase of trade and population,
the demand for mechanical work at length absorbed the
most proficient laborers; and thus a distinct class of in-
dustrial serfs was gradually specialized. There were
the serf-carpenter, the serf-blacksmith, the serf-shoe-
maker, etc.
Part of the raw material worked up by the artizan-
serf was produced on the home estate; but an increasing
part of it was imported from elsewhere through the deep-
ening and extending channels of a commercial system
which was growing up, so to speak, over his head.
Although the labor products of the artisan serf were
appropriated by his lord, his activities contributed, not
alone to the profit of the nobility, but to the general good.
The artizan could not perform his work without food and
clothing ; and these were supplied by his lord, in the per-
son of bailiff or manager, from the products of other serfs.
The agricultural workers, now able to devote themselves
more continuously and efficiently to food-producing occu-
pations, were, in turn, aided by the labor products of the '
artizan.
These hints give us an imperfect view of the social
evolution that was working out in the busy fields and vil-
lages and towns of the Middle Age, and leading up from
barbarism to the life of today. All attempts to examine
and interpret the different aspects of the subject reveal its
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 243
immense complexity, and the impossibility of tracing it
out in detail. But such attempts, while showing the im-
practicability of detailed reconstruction, prove that the
social process can be brought within the terms of general
propositions that faithfully describe the real facts.
§ 152. — This, the most primitive stage in the growth
of organized manufactures, began to be widely displaced
in England in the thirteenth century by the "guild sys-
tem.'' Under the new system the artizans gained their lib-
erty in ways presently to be suggested, and became towns-
men, participating in the chartered rights and immunities
purchased from the lords of the territories whereon the
towns arose. Among the most valued privileges conferred
by charter was that of having a general "merchant guild"
(27). The guild at first included merchants and artizans
alike, and gave them a monopoly of trade and the right to
fe their own prices (28). No man might carry on trade or
practice a craft unless he joined the town guild.
The transition from the primitive system to the guild
system was involved in the growth of commerce and of the
towns and the increasing use of money. A part of the
great unconscious movement of society, it was resisted by
the landed nobility, but favored by them at the same time
because irresistible (29). Along with the increasing circu-
lation of money, the lower classes were permitted to com-
mute their labor dues, payments, and rents in kind into
cash rents for land. The artizans, having been a compara-
tively small and favored section of the lower class, were
able to buy themselves free and go into the towns where
trade and manufactures were centering, and where there
was a growing demand for skilled and unskilled labor.
Often, indeed, evading all formality, serfs ran away in the
night; and if they remained in a chartered town "a year
and a day," they secured their freedom without ceremony
(30). In a brief survey, the most important thing to notice
is, not hoio the change from the primitive system to the
guild system came about, but that it actually took place.
244 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Off-hand statements about the transition are, at best^
somewhat obscure and inconsequential.
It will not do to condemn the guild monopoly on a
priori grounds evolved out of the modern inner conscious-
ness. Nor can we justly criticise it adversely from the
standpoint of the later achievements of progress. Profes-
sor Gross, for instance, in his invaluable work, for which
we are very grateful, pronounces the guild monopoly per-
nicious. But we must consider the circumstances of the
age, and the nature of the evolutionary process in which
the guilds were involved. The landed nobility were domi-
nant. They regarded the growing commercial and indus-
trial classes with suspicion and hostility, but were com-
pelled to tolerate them, since their services were indis-
pensable. They would have been glad to dictate prices to
the merchants and artizans ; but the townsmen, in defend-
ing their freedom against the nobility, must, above all
things, get the right to have a monopoly, and to ^x prices
to those who were formerly their masters and now their
principal customers. For it must be remembered that the
trades were supported as yet, not by the patronage of the
lower class, but by the nobility (31). It can hardly be
doubted that the right to fix prices was the most essential
element of guild liberty. It not only secured the prac-
tical independence of the merchants and craftsmen; but,
as we shall presently see, it helped them the more speedily
to accumulate capital and advance to a position where mo-
nopoly was no longer needed.
The following passage gives a glimpse of the changed
industrial conditions at this period :
"The great religious corporations and landowners
who had once provided on their own estates for all local
wants recognized the new condition of things, and instead
of making cloth at home as of old, sent every year far and
wide across the country to the great clothing centers to
buy material for their household liveries, seeking from one
place the coarse striped cloth of the old pattern and from
another the goods of the new fashion" (32).
t
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 245
§ 153. — At first the free artizan had little more in the
shape of accumulated capital than the tools of his craft.
His labor, as a rule, was piece-work. His patrons found
the materials, brought them to him, and paid him when
the work was finished (33).
But under these conditions the craftsmen began to ac-
cumulate wealth, and to enlarge their facilities (34)
"One notable fact in the economy of the fifteenth cen-
tury,'' observes Eogers, "is the development of the capi-
talist artisan. At a previous period in the social history
of England, this personage has scarcely an existence"
(35). By the time of Henry VII (1485-1509) artizans not
only had the necessary capital for large contracts, but
they found the materials as well. When this point was
reached, the craftsmen began to turn into capitalist em-
ployers of labor (36).
We make a serious mistake if we suppose the earlier
artizans of the towns to be representatives of those whom
we call today the "laboring classes," for the proletariat of
the towns and cities had not at that time come into prom-
inence. Craftsmen, indeed, usually had one or more as-
sistants; but these workers expected to set up for them-
selves in a few years, and enter the guild. Masters and
men wrought side by side ; and there was no social gulf be-
tween them — no struggle between capitalists and
laborers.
§ 154. — But the merchants and artizans of the towns
were not alone in securing enfranchizement from serf-
dom. Along with the changes that we have been consid-
ering, the entire lower class in England emerged from the
condition wherein they were legally anchored to the soil.
The increase of trade and manufacture created a de-
mand for an increase in the currency. At the same time
strong governments with wide jurisdictions were being
formed, which were able to furnish the desired currency.
Now that money was coming into general circulation, the
secular and ecclesiastical nobility began to bargain with
the serfs who lived on their lands. Instead of a rent of
246 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
labor products and personal services, the nobility now be-
gan to accept the worth of these products and services in
money. This was more convenient for both sides. It is
impossible to say when rents in service and in kind were
first commuted for cash. But in the thirteenth and four-
teenth centuries in England the movement had reached
large proportions; and in the middle of the fifteenth cen-
tury (1450) it was practically complete throughout the
country (37). On the continent this transformation was
more slowly effected.
The change was very important. On the one hand, it
worked the extinction of serf-slavery. On the other, it
went a long way toward converting the older, feudal form
of landholding into the present form of that institution.
It did not, however, bring in at once the practice of
leasing land for the highest obtainable cash rent. The old
villain services were simply commuted for a fixed rent in
cash. After this fixed money rent had been paid each year
the "copyholder," as he was now called, regarded the land
as his own. Of this we shall see more presently.
§ 155. — And now the movement of evolution carries
us forward another stage. By the middle of the sixteenth
century (1550) a great deal of capital had been amassed in
the towns ; and this was having a strange issue. Through-
out England in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the
older chartered towns, once the centers of busy and pros-
perous life, went into decay (38). The secret of this re-
markable fact was, that in the presence of a widening
market, and of the growing wealth which had been ac-
cumulated under the policy of monopoly, the guild sys-
tem, with its regulation of prices and wages and hours of
work, had served its day and at last become a barrier to
progress. While the old industrial centers were, in truth,
decaying, industry itself was prosperous, for capital and
labor were leaving the chartered towns and establishing
themselves in the smaller places where the guilds had no
jurisdiction (39). Grass grew in the streets of the older
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 247
towns; and under the stress of competition the guild law
became a dead letter in the places of its origin.
Then, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the
tide of industry, no longer fettered by the older monopoly,
surged back into many of the original chartered centers;
and throughout all England, in towns new and old, flowed
the currents of internal free trade, serving upper and
lower classes at once. The guilds faded away into social
clubs, whereof numbers are still in existence, interesting
survivals from conditions that have long since passed
away.
§ 156. — Accompanying these changes there came
gradually into existence what we now term the "proleta-
riat." At first, as we have seen, this class had no exist-
ence in the modern sense of the word, for masters and men
worked side by side, and the latter were admitted to the
guild in a few years and became head craftsmen them-
selves. But with the expansion of the market, the con-
tinued influx of liberated serfs from the country, and the
transformation of the original artizans into capitalist em-
ployers, the earlier condition of things prevailed less and
less. The guilds became exclusive ; and it was harder and
harder to obtain entrance to them. The craft guilds,
which arose by differentiation from the general guild
merchant, are well said to have consisted of the aristoc-
racy of labor (40).
As an outcome of these changes, the wealthy mer-
chants and manufacturers engrossed the houses and land
of the towns, reaching out more and more for property in
the agricultural districts. The same element also monop-
olized political power in the towns. No man could be a
burgess — a full citizen with a voice in the town govern-
ment — unless he were a guild brother and a landowner.
As Professor Ashley observes,
"A part of the inhabitants which constantly tended
to become smaller, the ^burgesses' proper, held alike the
government of the town and the monopoly of trade to and
248 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
from it. What is true of England is also probably true of
the whole of western Europe" (41).
After the guilds had broken down and lost their old
character, the manufacturing and mercantile classes no
longer felt the need of guild protection. They held the
land and most of the wealth in the towns ; and the right to
vote was hedged about with property qualifications.
§ 157. — Thus we behold all over western civilization,
as in the case of its classic predecessor, the marshalling of
a newly rich wing of the upper class. Under the old sys-
tem, the interests of this new part of the superior stratum
were inevitably brought into opposition to those of the
titled landed magnates, which, as we are bearing in mind,
consisted of the ecclesiastical and secular nobility. We
are now to witness a three-cornered fight between the
First, Second, and Third Estates, wherefrom the latter
issues triumphant. This fight convulsed western civili-
zation. In general, it is known as the Kef ormation ; but in
England it passed into the great Puritan Revolution,
which, although of local scope, was of universal signifi-
cance.
The popular idea is that the Reformation was a theo-
logical movement which turned upon questions that peo-
ple do not much trouble themselves about in the present
age. As we shall try to show in due order, there is a cer-
tain amount of truth in this view; but unless we are
astray, the conventional view, if unqualified, is false and
misleading. The Reformation was more than a theologi-
cal movement. It was based on economic conditions.
§ 158. — It is plain that by the beginning of the six-
teenth century the Roman Catholic Church, great as had
been its evolutionary value in the Middle Age, was no
longer discharging its old functions in the social economy.
Throughout England and northern Europe especially,
the wide estates of the Church *in the agricultural dis-
tricts were no longer the home of manufactures and com-
merce. These pursuits, as we have seen, had long been
gravitating to the towns that were everywhere growing
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 249
up. With the rise of merchants and master-manufactur-
ers, the ecclesiastical monopoly of learning and education
passed away. The towns were themselves becoming the
training ground for educators and administrators.
At the same time, the landed property of the Church
was being swelled to yet vaster proportions by the be-
quests of well-to-do persons, who, at the hour of death,
sought to make secure the future of their souls. The
holdings of religious corporations were also extended by
thrifty purchases.
Not only were the social functions of the Church de-
creasing, and its landed possessions unduly increasing;
but the ecclesiastical wing of the upper class was becom-
ing identified with many other evils. Church property
was usually exempt from the regular burdens of taxation,
which consequently rested upon the secular nobility and
the industrial classes of the towns with disproportionate
and increasing weight. In addition to its regular income
from the lower classes on its own estates, the clerical no-
bility was also able to make requisition upon the other
sections of society for various church dues. Controlling
the ecclesiastical courts, which had a wide jurisdiction
during the Middle Age, it was able to reach the pockets of
great and small in many ways by process of law.
To crown all these abuses, the streams of wealth
pouring into the hands of Roman bishops, priests, and
monks were obviously being squandered in luxury and im-
morality.
These considerations, together with the subsequent
history of western civilization, prove that the Church was
coming into the possession of more landed property than
it ought to hold; and that it was enjoying too much
wealth and power in proportion to services rendered. The
case may perhaps be summed up as an unconscious error
in capitalization.
Although the economic aspects of the Reformation
have not been treated as they will be in the future, they
have not lacked extended notice by modern writers. In
250 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the course of his inquiry into work and wages in England,
Eogers has pointed out the association between the rise
of commerce and the Reformation in the following words :
"It cannot be by accident that those parts of Europe
which have been from time to time distinguished for man-
ufacturing and commercial activity have also been, with
one exception, and that capable of easy explanation, gen-
erally hostile to the pretensions of the Church, and that
they have, when possible, revolted from it. It was so in
Toulouse, before the crusade of Simon de Montfort wasted
the fairest part of France. It was so in Flanders and Hol-
land, in the Baltic towns, in Scandinavia, and in the east-
ern parts of England. It was so in the most industrious
and opulent parts of France in the sixteenth century. It
was not indeed so in Italy. It was not in human nature
that it should willingly quarrel with the process by which
it became opulent, though in the end it paid dearly for its
advantages . . . Nor again can it be by accident that
those countries which have thrown off the yoke of the
Roman see were and have been most distinguished for in-
tellectual activity. The true literature of modern Europe
is almost exclusively the work of those countries in which
the Reformation has been finally settled — of England, of
Holland, of Northern Germany" (42).
The Reformation is principally associated with the
sixteenth century. But there were more or less distinct
foreshadowings of it long before that period. To go no
further back than the latter half of the fourteenth cen-
tury in England, we find the forces gathering headway
that were destined to strike down the Roman Church in
the most progressive countries of Europe. John Wikliffe
has been called "The Morning Star of the Reformation.'^
The conventional view represents him as principally en-
gaged in fighting for doctrines like those of the sixteenth-
century reformers, and as working for "the open Bible for
the people." But this was only one feature of his cam-
paign — and a later feature at that. Emphasis ought to
be laid on the fact that his preaching had an economic
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 251
side; and that the economic side came first. Mr. George
Macaulay Trevelyan, who has made a careful study of
England in the age of Wikliffe, says of the reformer that
"his demand for disendowment preceded his purely doc-
trinal heresies . . . , while his attack on the whole or-
ganization and the most prominent doctrines of the Medi-
aeval Church is found in its fulness only in his later
works" (43). Wikliffe was a professor in Oxford Uni-
versity; and was accounted the greatest scholar of his
time. In his book, "De Dominio Civili," he argued for the
secularization of Church property. A passage from his
writings may be fitly introduced here, giving his economic
position in his own words, a few terms being modernized.
"Secular lordships that ecclesiastics have full falsely
against God's law and spend them so wickedly, should be
given by the King and wise lords to poor gentlemen, that
would justly govern the people, and maintain the land
against enemies. And then might our land be stronger by
many thousand men of arms than it is now, without any
new cost of lords, or taxation of the poor commons, and be
discharged of great heavy rent, and wicked customs
brought up by covetous ecclesiastics, and of many taxes
and extortions by which they be now cruelly pillaged and
robbed" (44).
Two noblemen that stood near the English throne^
John of Gaunt and Lord Percy, invited Wikliffe to Lon-
don to advocate the cause of Church disendowment under
their patronage. John of Gaunt, the Duke of Lancaster,
was a son of the reigning King, the famous Edward IIL
His reformatory zeal was inspired by the hope that he and
his noble friends might obtain some of the Church prop-
erty.
But the Duke of Lancaster was doomed to disappoint-
ment. The demand for change was at that time prema-
ture and weak. The Church party, by an astute use of its
wealth and influence, was able to maintain its position for
many years thereafter.
■252 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
The secular wing of the upper class, however, did not
wait until the sixteenth century before taking positive ac-
tion of some kind. Although the lay princes did not ven-
ture to seize the vast landed estates of the Church during
the early period of the agitation against it, they passed
laws in many countries of Europe restricting the right of
the ecclesiastical nobility to acquire additional property.
English experience in respect of this matter is given by
Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England,
from which we cite a suggestive passage :
"Alienation in mortmain . . . is an alienation of
lands or tenements to any corporation, sole or aggregate,
ecclesiastical or temporal. But these purchases having
been made by religious houses, in consequence whereof the
lands became perpetually inherent in one dead hand, this
hath occasioned the general appelation of mortmain to be
applied to such alienations, and the religious houses them-
selves to be principally considered in forming the statutes
of mortmain ; in deducing the history of which statutes, it
will be matter of curiosity to observe the great address
and subtle contrivance of ecclesiastics in eluding from
time to time the laws in being, and the zeal with which
successive parliaments have pursued them through all
their finesses : how new remedies were still the parents of
new evasions; till the legislature at last, though with dif-
ficulty, hath obtained a decisive victory" (45).
It availed but little to pass laws against the extension
of Church property ; and the problem was not to be solved
in this fashion.
The merchants and artizans of the towns reacted more
and more against the Roman Church. "The instinct of
self-interest," says the historian Motley, "sharpens the eye
of the public. Many greedy priests of lower rank had
turned shopkeepers in the Netherlands, and were growing
Tich by selling their wares, exempt from taxation, at a
lower rate than lay hucksters could afford. The benefit of
clergy thus taking the bread from the mouths of many ex-
cites jealousy, the more so as, besides their miscellaneous
I
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 25S
business, the reverend traders have a most lucrative
branch of commerce from which other merchants are ex-
cluded.^ The sale of absolution [for sin] was the source of
large fortunes to the priests. The enormous impudence of
this traffic almost exceeds belief (46).
Not only were the mercantile and manufacturing peo-
ple thus alienated from the ecclesiastical section of the
upper class ; but the secular nobility, as already suggested
by the reference to John of Gaunt, were becoming more
and more hostile. In the transition period leading out
from the Middle Age into modern times, the fortunes of
the secular nobility were, indeed, at a low ebb. Their
property, as we have seen, consisted of agricultural estates
intermingled over the country with those of the Church.
They were already over-taxed as compared with their
brothers the Church magnates ; and it was becoming more
and more difficult for them to procure, from those who
held their lands, enough money to exchange with the city
merchants and manufacturers for the necessaries of life.
By the middle of the fifteenth century in England the
older land rents, consisting of personal services and pay-
ments in kind, had been commuted into their cash equiv-
alents. But although land values were undoubtedly ris-
ing, it was difficult for the nobility to increase their money
rents along with the increase of their expenses. These
rents represented old customs ; and they were supposed to
be fixed and incapable of development. To increase them
would be to provoke an inconvenient uprising. The mod-
ern practice of renting land for the highest obtainable
price was unknown, for there was as yet no general com-
petition among tenants. Thus it is that about this time we
begin to hear apparently inconsistent, but really well
founded, accounts of "poor nobles.''
It was easier for the "poor nobles" to quarrel among
themselves for each others lands than to put the screws
on their tenants; and this they did before the secular ele-
ments of the upper class finally united against the Church.
In the fifteenth century the descendants of John of Gaunt^
254 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the Duke of Lancaster, engaged in a civil war with an-
other family, the house of York, also descended from Ed-
ward III, John's father. The struggle between the houses
of Lancaster and York is known in history under the flow-
ery title "The Wars of the Koses.'' One side had the red
rose as its emblem ; the other the white. The objects of the
contestants were the crown of England, control of the na-
tional taxing power, and possession of each others estates.
One result of these conflicts was that the older, secular no-
bility was largely reduced in numbers. At the conclusion
of the Wars of the Roses, King Henry VII could find only
twenty-nine secular lords to sit in the upper house of the
first parliament of his reign.
Altogether, it is no matter for wonder when we see the
titled and untitled secular upper class turning from the
timid mediaeval policy of restricting clerical estates to the
bolder sixteenth century policy of confiscating Church
lands wholesale. "The religious reformation in every
land of Europe," says Motley, "derived a portion of its
strength from the opportunity it afforded to potentates
and great nobles for helping themselves to Church prop-
erty" (47).
The English Reformation began in the reign of Henry
the Eighth (1509-1547). In his time the pressure for eco-
nomic change became too great to be resisted. Successive
confiscations transferred the vast English property of the
Roman Catholic Church into the hands of the King, and
thence in large part to the secular upper class. Green
writes as follows:
"The bulk of these possessions were granted lavishly
away to the nobles and courtiers about the King, and to a
liost of adventurers who ^had become gospellers for the
abbey lands.' Something like a fifth of the actual land in
the kingdom was in this way transferred from the holding
of the Church to that of the nobles and gentry. Not only
were the older houses enriched, but a new aristocracy
was erected from among the dependants of the Court. The
Russells and the Cavendishes are familiar instances of
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 255
families which rose from obscurity through the enormous
grants of Church-land made to Henry's courtiers" (48).
So far as England was directly concerned, the final
drama of the Reformation centered around a great sea
battle forever famous in history. Philip II of Spain was
the successor of that Charles who was elected Emperor of
Germany, and who outlawed the German reformer, Martin
Luther, at the Diet of Worms. With the good will and
sanction of the Pope, King Philip gathered an immense
fleet, the great Spanish Armada, and prepared to send it
against the heretical island. Among other projects, his
plan was to reduce the country to a Spanish dependency,
restore to the Roman Church its confiscated possessions,
and re-establish the "true faith." English Jesuits assured
Philip that the English Catholics were waiting for him,
and would support him in force against Queen Elizabeth
as soon as the Spanish fleet appeared off the coast. But
when the Great Armada came sailing up the Channel, and
beacon fires blazed up by thousands all over the island,
the English Catholics joined their countrymen against the
foreigner. As Green well says, "England became Prot-
estant in heart and soul when Protestantism became iden-
tified with patriotism" (49).
§ 159. — As to the religious, or spiritual, aspects of the
Reformation, there is much to be said ; but we can refer to
this phase of the subject only by the way. When Chris-
tianity became the religion of the barbarians in the fifth
century after Christ, it accommodated itself to minds on
a lower level of culture than those in which the Christian
faith, and its parent, Judaism, had been developed. As a
result of this, and without blame on the part of anybody,
the Roman Catholic system in the Middle Age was barbar-
ous and superstitious. The intellectual pitch of Catholi-
cism in early western civilization was necessarily far below
that of the prophetic spirit, which, from Amos and Isaiah
to Jesus, had been associated, not with barbarism, but
with civilization. The progress of culture in western so-
256 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ciety, bringing it up to the level of the ancient civilization,
made inevitable a doctrinal readjustment of some kind.
But the Eeformation was not a "ghost-dance on a
floor of clouds." A doctrinal and spiritual change would,
indeed, have been a reformation; but it would not have
been the Eeformation that actually took place. The
actual, historical Reformation was accompanied by a vast
confiscation of Church property, and by other great eco-
nomic changes. It convulsed Europe for many years in
wars that cost millions of lives. These conflicts were not
fought over airy doctrines. They had a materialistic
basis; and the doctrines were the flags, or badges, that
distinguished the antagonists.
§ 160. — The Reformation restored the economic bal-
ance of society. It did not effect the political enfranchize-
ment of the Third Estate; and this part of the growth of
western civilization was a long process beginning before,
and continuing after, the Reformation. In the transfer
of the basis of the State from family to property, England
led the way. The other western powers have built their
governments after her model, showing that England
merely gave expression to universal forces.
After England had been freed from ecclesiastical dom-
ination, she was gradually driven into a struggle with the
arbitrary power of the Crown. The Tudor family had
been succeeded by the Stuarts ; and this family attempted
to tax and govern the nation at their own pleasure.
The first of the Stuarts to inherit the English crown
was James VI of Scotland, or James I of England. Be-
fore assuming his new principality, he had struggled with
the Scotch lords on behalf of national authority against
their local, feudal independence; and his idea of the di-
vine right of kings was ver^^ high. The changes intro-
duced into Scotland by the Reformation had also contrib-
uted to make James equally arbitrary in matters of relig-
ion. The retention of their independent character so far
into modern times by the Scotch lords is one aspect of the
backwardness of social development in the Scotland of
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 257
that period. Owing largely to the nature and position of
the country, the currents of commerce had not circulated
as freely as in England. There was a national congress,
or parliament; but the kings had summoned only the
secular and ecclesiastical nobility to it. At the time of
the Keformation, the Scotch lords, like the secular nobility
elsewhere, had appropriated the local estates of the Eo-
man Church. The exclusion of the trading classes from a
voice in the Scotch government threw them into an oppo-
sition which drew the peasantry with it. The rise of the
Scotch Kirk, with its National Assembly, gave the people
an organ through which to express their opinions and
grievances in matters of economics and politics. Here,
again, religion acted as a rallying point for society, and as
a disguise for economic movements. "It is the Scotch
people," says Green, "that rises into being under the guise
of the Scotch Kirk" (50).
It was with a temper hardened by his conflicts with
the Scotch lords and the Scotch Kirk that James came to
take the English crown. The struggle of Puritanism
against the arbitrary policies of the Stuarts, although
flavored with religion, was fundamentally economic.
The difference between the political history of Eng-
land and that of the continental states has been unduly
emphasized by many writers. The English Parliament
has been referred to as a peculiar creation of the national
genius, whereby the liberties of "the people" were pre-
served at a time when the governments of the rest of Eu-
rope were arbitrarily controlled by monarchy and aris-
tocracy. But in the very century in which the English
Parliament assumed its characteristic form similar bodies
were convoked in Spain, France, Germany and Sicily. The
evolution of continental parliaments was, however,
checked for a time by local circumstances which it is not
here essential to notice. The growth of the English Par-
liament at a period in which no similar institution could
thrive in Europe at large was likewise based on peculiar-
17
258 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ities in the social history of Britain. The difference be-
tween the political development of England and that of
the other progressive states of Europe has been more a
matter of form than of substance. England, equally with
Europe, has illustrated the overshadowing law of cleav-
age. The Upper House of the English Parliament, or
House of Lords, has always been upper-class in substance
and name. And until the nineteenth century the so-called
Lower House, or House of Commons, included no repre-
sentatives from the economic lower class. "The two
Houses,'^ writes Bagehot, "were not in their essence dis-
tinct, they were in their essence similar, they Avere, in the
main, not Houses of contrasted origin, but Houses of like
origin. The prominent party of both was taken from the
same class — from the English gentry, titled and un-
titled" (51). In the seventeenth century the Lower
House consisted of representatives from the lesser landed
aristocracy throughout the country districts, and of repre-
sentatives from the commercial and manufacturing upper
class in the towns. In substance it was practically as
aristocratic as the House of Lords.
With the grudging consent of English kings and lords,
the principle had been established that the House of Com-
mons should have control over all money bills.
This principle, however, had been established more
in theory than in practice. The idea still prevailed
throughout western civilization as a whole that the gov-
ernment of society belonged of right to ancient noble fam-
ilies, to be exercised at their discretion. The English
royal and noble families, as just observed, had been slow to
admit the power of the House of Commons over taxation
and other affairs of government; and in the seventeenth
century after Christ the struggle between the Clan State
and the Property State, which had been fought out on
Roman soil by the patricians and plebeians, was at length
brought to an issue on the soil of England. The Clan
State was powerful enough in seventeenth-century Eng-
land to make a great struggle for supremacy. On the
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 259
side of Charles I, the son of James, were most of the no-
bility of the House of Lords and the other landowning
classes in the country districts, including large numbers
of the constituents of the House of Commons. On the side
of the Commons were some of the landowning classes in
the country districts and practically all of the upper
classes in the towns (52). Looking back on the struggle
from this distance in time, it is easy to see that the burden
of the Parliamentary fight against the king was borne by
the towns. The country upper class might, and actually
did, differ among themselves touching the wisdom of ar-
bitrary monarehial government; but it was the aristoc-
racy of London and the other towns, together with the
population dependent upon them, that turned the scales.
Mr. Lecky well says that just as, at the time of the Kefor-
mation, the towns were the strongholds of Protestantism,
so, at the time of the reaction against the Monarchy, the
towns were the strongholds of Puritanism (53). If it had
not been for the wealth and industry accumulated in the
towns, it would seem that the government of England at
this period, like those of Spain and France, must have be-
come a central despotism.
Professor Gardiner, in writing of the period which he
has made his own, rounds out our view by saying suggest-
ively that "Puritanism had no deep hold in the minds of
the agricultural poor'' — that is, the rustic lower class,
which worked the soil of England without owning it ; and
he adds that "they wanted to be let alone that they might
be allowed to earn their daily bread in peace" (54). It
should be emphasized, indeed, that this great civil struggle
of the seventeenth century was an upper-class conflict ; and
that it did not secure political rights for the lower, un-
propertied class either in town or country.
§ 161. — Having glanced at the Reformation and Puri-
tanism, we must now take some notice of the conditions
leading directly to the overflow of European society upon
the soil of the New World.
260 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
We have seen that by the middle of the fifteenth cen-
tury the increasing use of money had led to the transfor-
mation into cash rents of the older personal services and
payments in kind rendered by the lower class. From serfs
who had held plots of land on villan tenure, and been
bound to the soil by law, there had sprung, by the middle
of the fifteenth century, an order of "yeomen," or small
farmers. The yeomen, it must be carefully noted, did not
hold their farms in absolute ownership. They paid a
money rent to the large landed proprietors out of whose
estates their holdings were carved; but their farms were
deemed by custom to be theirs to pass on from father to
son. It should be noted with equal care that the yeomen
were not coextensive with the lower class. They sprang
from those of the lower class who were fortunate enough
to possess agricultural holdings at the period in which the
commutation of the older villan services into money rents
was taking place. Their rents, which, as we have seen,
were at first fixed in amount, fell further and further be-
low the true rent, or absolute worth of the land they held.
As population multiplied, increasing the number of poor
and landless laborers, it is evident that the yeomen were
thus put more and more into the position of small monop-
olists who held title to the earth as against the property-
less classes. In Bishop Latimer's first sermon before Ed-
ward VI we obtain an interesting glimpse of the yeo-
manry, and of the propertyless classes which everywhere
existed and multiplied alongside of them. He states that
his father was a yeoman, and held a farm for a small
rental ; that he had a hundred sheep and thirty cows ; that
he was able to keep in school the boy who afterward be-
came Bishop Latimer ; that he gave each of his daughters
a goodly sum when they were married; that he employed
six laborers ; and that he was hospitable to his poor neigh-
bors (55). The yeomen had, in fact, acquired a minor in-
terest in the land monopoly of the country; and, like all
small monopolists, they were doomed to be crushed out.
Their lands were increasing in value, but were not being
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 261
put to the most efficient use, and were yielding neither
rental nor taxation on their true value.
In the midst of these conditions the merchants and
manufacturers of the towns began more and more to put
their surplus wealth into landed estates in the agricul-
tural districts. They either bought out the landlords, or
leased of them at higher figures than the yeomanry were
paying. As a result, many of the small farmers were
evicted from their customary holdings. In describing this
change. Green says that the merchant classes "began to in-
vest largely in land, and . . . were restrained by few
traditions or associations in their eviction of the smaller
tenants. The land indeed had been greatly underlet, and
as its value rose with the peace and firm government of the
early Tudors the temptation to raise the customary rents
became irresistible" (56). The fact is, that a change in
landholding was inevitable. When we consider the im-
mense revolutions with which modern history opens, both
in State and Church, and the dense ignorance of the age
concerning social laws, it is plain that great suffering was
as inevitable as great change.
The yeomen were not all evicted at the same time.
Large numbers were thrust out in the first half of the six-
teenth century (1500-1550). But perhaps the majority of
them were able, with economy, to pay the increased rental
demanded of them. We know that Bishop Latimer's
father, who had paid four pounds per year at the most,
was replaced by a man who paid the landlord sixteen
pounds annually (57); and this increase was not unusual.
Prices of agricultural products rose during the last half of
the sixteenth century, affording the farmers temporary
relief.
But in the first half of the seventeenth century rents
began once more to advance. All the good lands near the
more settled parts of the country had been enclosed and
reduced to private property by this time; and the poorer
yeomen began to think about leaving England for other
parts. It was but natural that they should become Puri-
262 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
tans. Politics and religion were united. King James, who
had struggled with the Scotch people when they took the
guise of the Scotch Kirk, declared that all the people of
England should be made to conform to the Anglican Prot-
estant Church, and to support its priests. "I will make
the Puritans conform!'' he exclaimed, when outlining the
religious phase of his policy. "And if they will not con-
form," added the King, "I will harry them out of the
land!" Anglicanism in religion came to be associated
with the policy of taxing and governing at the monarch's
pleasure; and it is not strange that the Puritan migra-
tion from England assumed the religious form. In 1607 a
small congregation of yeomen, centering in the little vil-
lage of Scrooby in Nottinghamshire, set sail for Hol-
land. On the Continent, however, they found that indus-
' trial conditions were as hard as in their old home. It be-
came evident that they could find no satisfactory abiding
place in Europe ; and in 1620 they sailed away in the little
ship Mayflower to the New World.
Had it not been for the outlet afforded by the opening
of America at this period, it is likely that western civiliza-
tion would more quickly have developed the modern social
problem. The unused land of Europe was being rapidly
appropriated; and lacking the great American safety-
valve, the like of which no earlier society in an equal state
of culture had enjoyed, there is little doubt that the third
great civilization of history, like its classic and oriental
predecessors, would long ago have degenerated, and per-
ished under a flood of barbarism.
§ 162. — The relation of the principle of cleavage-
capitalization to the discovery, settlement and growth of
America is obscured both by the individualistic psychology
common to all societies, and by the economic conditions
under which the social development of America has taken
place. The same naive conceptions of American history
seem to lie alike in the mind of the school boy, the Fourth-
of-July orator, the platform lecturer, the plain citizen,
and the majority of educated persons. If you ask your
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 263
neighbor about the facts, the same answer is almost in-
variably elicited. America, says the tradition, was col-
onized by people who were seeking an opportunity to prac-
tice religion after the dictates of their own consciences.
The tradition yields nothing more than vague ideas about
"people who came over," like men who cross from one side
of the street to the other. The colonial period, beginning
in the sixteenth century, has already sunk to the level of
dim, ancient history. The popular mind is intellectually
too sluggish to inquire into the vital facts underlying the
relations of America to Europe and to earlier society in
general. American history, to the popular mind, began
in the New World. It is admitted that there is a histori-
cal connection of some kind between America and the Old
World ; but that connection is mostly thought of under its
conventional form, not in its vital substance. The tra-
dition tells us about "people who came over'' in search of
religious liberty. The descendants of these people were
oppressed by a British King, and revolted from his des-
potic rule. They set up a government, so the tradition
runs, under which all men were and are free and equal.
We are assured that the American people, owing either to
peculiar virtues of their own, or to the blessing of God, or
both, have been and are happier than any other people on
earth. And it must be confessed that the scholarly treat-
ment of the subject has been controlled more by conven-
tional, individualistic, easy-going views than by concep-
tions arising out of an inductive examination of society at
large.
Looking at America from the standpoint of our guid-
ing conception, the facts take on a different aspect from
that which they bear in the popular traditions. American
society is a part of western civilization, modified by the
physical environment of the New World ; and it is not es-
sentially different from society in England, France, and
Germany. Its history began in western and central
Europe,, and around the northern and eastern shores
of the Mediterranean, as well as in prehistoric ages.
AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
It affords no more illustration of individualism than
any other part of human society; and regarded from
the cosmic standpoint, American social development
bears witness to the same law of capitalization that we
have hitherto traced in prehistoric, ancient, mediaeval, and
modern times.
The discovery of America was itself a capitalized
achievement, both from the material and from the spir-
itual standpoint. The story of Columbus is familiar; but
we hardly pause to think of the significant fact that his
great voyage of discovery was made on the basis of a mass
of capital in the form of ships, metal and wooden imple-
ments, food supplies for a long period, etc. (58). The less
famous voyages of discovery and exploration that were
made in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries represent a
jarge outlay of wealth.
Turning to the settlement of the country, we natur-
ally recur to the first Pilgrim congregation. We find that
these people obtained from seventy upper-class merchants
a loan of 7,000 English pounds, wherewith to purchase
transportation facilities and supplies (59). When we
think of the Pilgrims, we imagine them, under the forms
of individualism, simply as "people who crossed the
ocean;'' and we forget, or ignore, the social capital of all
kinds, material and intangible, without which their enter-
l^rize would have been a failure. And so of American col-
onization as a whole. European immigration to America
flowed out from a society which had been raised from no-
madic barbarism into a settled economy wherein a vast and
various mass of social capital had been rolled up across
fifteen centuries and more of cleavage. European immi-
gration to America has brought the Past Avith it across
the Atlantic. It avails nothing to declare that if the emi-
grants had been previously permitted to work under con-
ditions of industrial freedom and individualism they could
have produced suflftcient capital with which to colonize
America. Such a thought is wholly beside the question.
The Pilgrim fathers themselves upheld private property in
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 266
land, the second historical basis of cleavage; and the idea
of individualism is only a passing dream.
What would have been the fate of all European emi-
grants to America if they had been deprived of the capital
with which the great enterprize has been accomplished?
Before answering this question, it is necessary to inquire
further what it would mean to deprive European emigrants
of capital. It would mean simply reduction to the savage
level or lower. All their material and spiritual capital
would be taken from them. They would be deprived of
-ships, metal implements, guns, gunpowder, food supplies
in store, the accumulated knowledge of generations, co-
operative training and habits of thought. If the emigrants
had succeeded in crossing the ocean, it would merely have
been another case of barbarian against barbarian, savage
against savage; and we are familiar with results under
such conditions. In the actual course of history, capital-
ized European immigration to America has pushed the
Indian brother aside like one of the lower animals, and
-entered into his heritage. When the Israelites conquered
Canaan, they intermarried with the Canaanites, and re-
duced many of them to the lower class. But the social
distance between western civilization and Indian barbar-
ism has been so great that the Indian could not perma-
nently compete against the white man, even in the lower
class! The closer we look into the subject, the plainer
•does it become that the forces of organized society in the
Old World prepared the way, under the direction of the
Tipper class, for the overflow of western civilization into
America; and that the settlement of the population has
been accomplished at every stage with the help of material
and intangible capital accumulated through cleavage.
We must notice more fully the relation of cleavage to
the development of America. From the sixteenth century
onward the stream of immigration to the New World has
I)een derived from upper and lower classes, although more
of course from the lower. Early colonial society was cap-
italized by European commercial companies, and by indi-
266 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
vidual wealthy persons. Many wealthy persons, indeed^
came over in the hope of increasing their fortunes by trade
with Europe. Social distinctions were in evidence from
the first. Slavery flourished from Florida to Maine. Ne-
groes were imported mostly into the south. In the north-
ern colonies the lower class was more mixed. Indians and
negroes were used; but the Indians were more numerous,
and the negroes fewer, than at the south. White slavery
was everywhere established in a modified form. This was
recruited partly from transported convicts who were sold
for periods of years, but more largely from the trade in
lower class Europeans known as "redemptioners," or "in-
dented servants." These masses of laborers were used in
all kinds of work — agricultural, commercial, and man-
ufacturing. Negro slavery, as is well known, finally be-
came the rule at the south. In the central and northern
colonies, Indian slavery continued through the seven-
teenth century and into the eighteenth. But the modified
white slavery, above-mentioned, more and more displaced
it as the Indian tribes were driven westward and the tide
of immigration rolled in from Europe. The trade in white
redemptioners became important in the seventeenth cen-
tury, swelled to great proportions in the eighteenth, and
continued into the early years of the nineteenth. By the
beginning of the nineteenth century, an American upper
class of wealthy landholders and capitalists had been fully
formed. And just as the Indian was crowded out of the
lower class by the redemptioner, so the trade in redemp-
tioners died away as the American lower class increased in
numbers, and as vast armies of so-called "free laborers'^
came in from England, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Germany,
Scandinavia, and elsewhere. These native and foreign-
born free laborers competed with each other for employ-
ment at the hands of the propertied upper class ; and it was
cheaper to employ such workers than to buy redemp-
tioners (60).
We do not realize as we should the true nature of
American history. Never before in all time was there
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 267
«
opened such a tremendous empire of good, unmonopolized
soil to the settlement of such a highly capitalized race.
This fact is unique. Looking at American history simply
from the American standpoint, and without reference to
its connection with earlier social evolution in the Old
World, we can easily mark its contrast with the histories
of such countries as England, Germany, France, Greece,
Eome, Egypt, Chaldea, and Israel. Compare the United
States with these other nations ; and the point that we are
trying to illustrate will come clearly out. As we have
seen many times, the beginnings of these earlier peoples
were made in barbarism and savagery. It was barbarian
conquests that laid the foundations of Israel, Egypt, Chal-
dea, Greece, Eome, England, Germany, and France. It
was not until three great civilizations had thus arisen
through long centuries of capitalization by cleavage that
American history, in the more restricted sense, began. The
discovery, exploration, and settlement of America have
been capitalized from the Old World. Cleavage has been
a great factor from the first. But the presence of good,
free soil upon which capital and labor could expand with
little or no social restriction made it impossible for the
American upper class to acquire an Old World grip on the
lower class ; and, as a rule, wages have not been so low in
America as in Europe. We are speaking now not so much
of present American society as of earlier conditions. If
America, instead of being the vast continent that it is, had
been a strip of soil five hundred miles long and one hun-
dred miles wide, its land would have been promptly mo-
nopolized; and the social conditions of the Old World
would have been quickly reproduced. Perhaps we should
say, "more quickly reproduced;" but this would carry us
ahead of our present point. The tradition which connects
freedom with America more than with other countries is
clearly due to the conjunction of two factors: large and
various capital in the broadest sense here given the word,
and free land. American freedom is not a creation of
•268 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
Americans. It is cosmic, whether we approach it from the
physical or from the sociological standpoint.
§ 163. — At this point let us once more take up our
position in England.
From about the middle of the sixteenth century-
onward for a period of over two hundred years, until the
latter half of the eighteenth century, there were no great
nor specially significant changes in the process that we are
tracing. On the Continent the Eeformation was more
tardy of settlement than in England; and that kingdom
profited much by the dissensions of its neighbors. Thou-
sands and thousands of thrifty artizans and merchants
were driven into England and America. It was in this
period that the industrial supremacy of England in west-
ern civilization became an accomplished fact. Agriculture,
however, still engaged the majority of her people. None of
the great labor-saving machines had been introduced. Man-
ufactures were partly carried on by capitalist employers in
the towns ; and, as in the woolen industry, by country folk,
who combined spinning and weaving with the cultivation
of small plots of land. There were, of course, many small
shops with one workman, like the shoemaker or the black-
smith ; but we are speaking mainly of the larger and char-
acteristic tendencies ; and it may be profitably noticed, by
the way, that these "individual" workmen derived raw
material in most cases from an industrial and commercial
system organized before their time by the forces that we
have been studying. There were, of course, no railroads,
telegraphs, nor steamships. Goods were carried slowly
on pack-horses and wagons, and in sailing vessels along
rivers and over sea. English merchants were now trad-
ing with America, Africa, Arabia, India, Holland, Ger-
many, France, Russia, Norway, Italy, Turkey, and other
countries. Meanwhile the value of land was rising, irreg-
ularly but steadily; and the landed upper class was in-
vesting rents in commerce and manufactures, or making
loans to the industrial world. But society was turning
less to the purely landed class for the accumulation of the
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 26^
capital upon which all depended. Merchants, out of their
surplus, were lending to manufacturers; the latter were
lending to the former ; and both of these were augmenting
their capital, not only out of the profits of sales to the
landed class, but from transactions with humbler folk as
well. Naturally, however, they still found their most
profitable customers in the upper class; while they them-
selves, we should remember, had invested a goodly part
of their wealth in real estate, and were constantly receiv-
ing ground rents. It should not be overlooked that the
wealth pouring into England through the mighty currents
of her world-wide commerce was appropriated from the
labor of the lower classes by the economic masters of the
countries with which England exchanged her products.
On the whole, this period of about two centuries
marks a further increase of capital. Sir William Temple
(61), writing in the last quarter of the seventeenth cen-
tury, remarked as a new thing the many marriages con-
tracted in the preceding fifty years between commercial
and landed families. Ma<!aulay (62) takes particular no-
tice of the increasing capital seeking for investment in the
period between the Eestoration and the Kevolution (1660-
1688); and the eagerness with which the public took the
stock of the great South Sea Company and other schemes,
legitimate and illegitimate, in the first quarter of the
eighteenth century, showed that the same process of ac-
cumulation was going on.
§ 164. — In the latter half of the eighteenth century
there began certain great changes, known collectively as
the "industrial revolution," whose influence upon the de-
velopment of society has been incalculable. Hitherto, as
we have seen, there had been no machine industry in the
modern sense. But now many labor-saving inventions
were brought out; and several great discoveries were made
within a short space of time. Their effect was to reinforce
the power of man over nature, so that production could be
enlarged and perfected to an extent never dreamed of be-
fore. Only a brief and suggestive catalog need be given.
■570 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
The earliest inventions were in the textile industries. The
spinning wheel and the hand loom had been used since
time out of mind. But now came the flying shuttle of
Kay, the spinning jenny of Hargreaves, the spinning frame
of Arkwright, the spinning mule of Crompton, the power
loom of Cartwright, and the cotton gin of Whitney; and
these machines revolutionized the manufacture of cotton,
woolen, and linen goods. Until far into the eighteenth
century wood had been used for iron-smelting; and the
scarcity of fuel, together with primitive methods, had lim-
ited the output of metal. But now it was discovered that
coal could be used for smelting ; an improved air blast was
invented; and the modern coal and iron industries were
founded. The cardinal factor of power was yet lacking.
The great and increasing demand for this was met by
James Watt, who improved and practicalized the steam
engine. Work which hitherto had been performed by the
muscles of man and beast, and the force of wind and
water, was now accomplished by a power which could be
applied almost everywhere, increasing the efficiency of
human effort a million fold. The demand for adequate
means of transportation was met by the cutting of canals,
and later with railroads and steamships. And such was
the outward aspect of the great industrial revolution.
The new machines and processes were thought out by
persons in all ranks of society. No class monopolized the
initiative. But wherever the original brain might be, its
product, in order to be spread abroad in the world, re-
quired the help of capital which was already in existence
or which could be readily assembled out of the fruits of
labor. This was furnished by the manufacturing, com-
mercial, and landed aristocracy. Two suggestive exam-
ples will be given ; but the fact ought not to require much
illustration. Of Watt, the improver of the steam engine,
and of the circumstances connected with the introduction
of this machine to the world, we learn the following :
"It was his good fortune to be early supported by Dr.
John Eoebuck, a man of singular enterprize and ability,
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 271
who carried on large ironworks on the Carron, in Stirling-
shire, and afterwards, Avhen Roebuck had been ruined, to
be taken into partnership by Matthew Bolton, the head of
the great ironworks at Soho, near Birmingham. Assisted
by the capital and labor at the disposal of a great manu-
facturer, the most splendid inventive genius of the eight-
eenth century had full scope to display itself" (63).
"In 1776 Watt's engine . . . was a success. Or-
ders came in fast . . . Saw-mills in America, sugar-
mills in the West Indies, paper-mills, flour-mills, engines
for flint-grinding in the potteries, were ordered in quick
succession. In 1785 one was ordered for a silk-mill in
Macclesfield, and one was built for Robinson's cotton-mill
at Papplewick, in Nottinghamshire. The first engines in
Manchester and Glasgow were set to work in 1789 and
1792 respectively. In fact, between 1780 and 1800 the
steam engine was established as the motive power of the
day" (64).
Concerning the introduction of canals we read to sim-
ilar effect :
"Francis, Duke of Bridgewater, . . . was the pos-
sessor of collieries at Worsley whose value depended on
their finding a market at the neighboring town of Man-
chester and it was to bring his coal to this market that he
resolved to drive a canal from the mine to the river Irwell.
With singular good luck he found a means of carrying out
his design in a self-taught mechanic, James Brindley. But
in Brindley's mind the scheme widened far beyond the
plans of the duke . . . , and, instead of ending in the
Irwell, he carried the duke's canal by an aqueduct across
that river to Manchester itself (65).
"Barton aqueduct was built, and the whole canal com-
pleted ... in 1761, and the price of coal in Manches-
ter fell from 7d. per cwt. to 3Jd. Not content with this,
the duke set Brindley to work at once on another canal
connected with the first at Longford bridge and going to
Runcorn. This was also successfully carried through, at
a cost of £220,000. Long before it was finished the duke
272 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
was at his wit's end for money. On one occasion he sent
his steward around to collect scraps of rent in advance ta
pay his workmen" ( 66).
"What Brindley had discovered was, in fact, the
water-road, a means of carrying heavy goods with the least
resistance, and therefore the least cost, from the point of
production to the point of sale; and England at once
seized on his discovery to free itself from the bondage in
which it had been held. From the year 1767, when Brind-
ley completed his enterprize, a net-work of such water-
roads was flung over the country; and before the move-
ment had spent its force. Great Britain alone was
traversed in every direction by three thousand miles of
navigable canals. To English trade the canal opened up
thi^ richest of all markets, the market of England itself.
Every part of the country was practically thrown open to
the manufacturer; and the impulse which was given by
this facility of carriage was at once felt in a vast develop-
ment of production" (67).
The capitalizing of the industrial revolution, however^
was more than a physical matter. The revolution was a
great mental movement on the basis of a huge volume of
intangible capital which had been slowly accumulated by
the experience of three historic civilizations.
§ 165.- — Looking around us in present-day society, we
see a huge industrial plant which millions of people util-
ize in preparing the earth's resources in support of life.
This plant is technically known as "capital." Looking at
it first on the material side, and attempting a brief but
suggestive enumeration, it consists of such things as fac-
tory buildings, with tools, machinery, and appliances of
all kinds ; agricultural implements ; domestic utensils ;
mining machinery, railroad tracks, cars and engines;
steamships ; business blocks ; dwelling houses, etc., etc. If
it were all gathered together and piled up in one place,
what a huge mountain of art it would make!
But material forms of capital imply intangible forms
of it. And who can rightly estimate the quantity and
WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
273
variety of the intangible capital now lying at the disposal
of men? Concerning intellectual achievements Mr. Benja-
min Kidd well says : "They are not the colossal products
of individual minds amongst us ; they are all the results of
small accumulations of knowledge slowly and painfully
made and added to by many minds through an indefinite
number of generations in the past, every addition to this
store of knowledge affording still greater facilities for
further additions'' (68). Accumulated knowledge may be
taken as representing intangible capital.
The two general forms of capital, indeed, go together,
and are accumulated together ; and we may work up to the
illustration of our thesis from either standpoint. Refer-
ring broadly to both forms of capital, Mr. Bellamy has
well said : "All that man produces to-day more than 4id
his cave dwelling ancestors, he produces by virtue of the
accumulated achievements, inventions, and improvements
of the intervening generations, together with the social
and industrial machinery which is their legacy . . .
Nine hundred and ninety-nine parts out of the thousand
of every man's produce are the result of his social inheri-
tance and environment" (69).
Our prehistoric ancestors of the stone age, and of still
earlier times, dragged out their miserable lives with little
or no capital of any kind. And what should we of west-
ern civilization do, if, at birth, we were thrust into the
midst of the primitive struggle for existence? What
would distinguish us from our prehistoric ancestors?
Nothing of moment. Prehistoric men could not invent the
telegraph, discover the differential calculus, build a sky
scraper, nor construct a steam engine; and we, if removed
at birth from all contact with civilization, with its ac-
cumulated capital of all kinds, could not surpass the
achievements of our primitive ancestors. We too, growing
up from birth wholly outside the influence of civilization,
should live the animal existence of primeval men.
18
274 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
The vast and various capital around us in modern
society, then, has been produced by the aid of earlier cap-
ital, which, in turn, rested back upon still earlier, and so
on. Broadly speaking, capital has developed along with
the evolution of society. Let us here confine ourselves, for
the sake of simplicity, to its material forms. Having been
reserved out of labor products, thrown over from genera-
tion to generation, and renewed and added to, capital ha»
at length — across the flight of time and the mutations of
mortality — accumulated into that vast industrial plant
which is employed today in working up the earth's re-
sources into the form of consumable goods.
Now, according to the present thesis, the principal
agency whereby this industrial outfit has become a con-
crete fact in society is to be found in social cleavage,
based at first on personal slavery and serfdom which, in
modern times, have been commuted into competitive land
rents.
This vast collective process, continually piling up a
greater and greater mass of social capital, has gone for-
ward under the forms of individualism ; and, moreover, the
psychology of society is still individualistic. Persons who
possess wealth, whether in small or in large amounts,
think and speak about their own and other people's wealth
in the individualistic way. We say, ^^There is a man who
began life with little or nothing. But by industry and
economy he has accumulated fifty millions;" and we
thoughtlessly accept this account as the whole and exact
truth. But there is no individual fortune in civilization
which is not practically social in its origin and which
does not derive significance more from society than
from the person identified with it. The history of indi-
vidual fortunes can be expressed by an almost unvarying
general formula which involves the proposition of cleav-
age. "The rich man," says Frederick Harrison (and he
could as well have said the small property holder), "is
simply the man who has managed to put himself at the end
of a long chain, or into the center of an intricate convolu-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 275
tion, and whom society and law suffer to retain the joint
product conditionally" (70).
Our inquiry could fitly be brought to a period at this
point. But the disturbances now agitating society are
such that we can hardly close without a word in regard to
the bearing of social cleavage upon present conditions.
We have seen that the oriental and classic civilizations,
after emerging upon the stage of history, developed a
social problem which grew out of the great fact of cleav-
age; and, unless we are mistaken, western society is re-
producing the conditions of its predecessors in this re-
spect. It will hardly be disputed that cleavage has an
important bearing of some kind upon the present social
problem; and our idea of its relation to contemporary
questions is briefly indicated in the following chapter.
(1) — Strabo, in Schrader's Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryans
(London, 1890. Jevons' trans.), p. 281.
(2) — Gross, Sources and Literature of English History (London,
1900), p. 55. Cf. Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Com-
merce (Cambridge, 1896), I, pp. 26, 27.
(3) — Holmes, Caesar's Conquest of Gaul (London, 1899), pp. 12,
13. Tacitus, Germania, chap. 25. Cf. StubbS; Constitutional History of
England (Oxford, 1875), sec. 14.
(4) — Hallam, Europe in the Middle Ages, Chap. 7. Cf. Motley,
Rise of the Dutch Republic, Introduction, sec. 5. Cf. Blok, History of
the People of the Netherlands (N. Y., 1898. Bierstadt and Putnam's
trans.), I, p. 170f. Cf. Henderson, Germany in the Middle Ages (Lon-
don, 1894), pp. 34, 135. Cf. Tuttle, History of Prussia (Boston, 1884),
pp. 26, 58.
(5) — Kemble, The Saxons in England (London, 1876), II, p. 358.
Cf. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (any ed.), item "Anno 657."
(6)— Pearson, History of England (London, 1867), I, p. 383.
(7)— Gneist, History of the English Constitution (N. Y., 1886.
Ashworth's trans.), II, p. 155. Cf. Pearson, History of England, I, pp.
814, 635. Cf. Putnam, Books and Their Makers in the Middle Ages (N.
Y., 1899), Preface. Cf. Macaulay, History o;f England, chap 3.
(8) — Vinogradoff, Villainage in England (Oxford, 1892), p. 178.
Cf. Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law (Cambridge, 1895),
I, p. 38.
276 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
(9) — On the English lower class, Cf. Seebohm, The English Vil-
lage Community (London, 1884), pp. 89-97. Pollock and Maitland,
History of English Law, I, pp. 11-13, 395-416. Kemble^ The Saxons in
England, I, pp. 185-225. Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond (Cam-
bridge, 1897), pp. 26-66. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
sec. 132. Same in France and Germany: Mombert^ Charles the Great
(N. Y., 1888), pp. 64, 65.
(10) — ViNOGRADOFF, Villainage in England, p. 57.
(11) — Bede, Ecclesiastical History of England (London, Giles* ed.),
ix.
(12)— Pauli, Life of Alfred (London, 1878), p. 227.
(13) — Janssen, History of the German People (St. Louis. Mitchell
and Christie's trans.), II, pp. 1-3,
(14) — Lapsley, in English Historical Review, XIV, p. 515.
(15) — Stubbs, Constitutional History of England (Oxford, 1878),
III, p. 610.
(16) — Rogers, History of English Agriculture and Prices (Oxford,
1866), I, pp. 160, 161. Cf. Turner, History of the Anglo-Saxons (Lon-
don, 1828), III, p 83. Stubbs, Constitutional History, III, pp. 606, 607.
Gneist, History of the English Constitution, II, pp. 105, 106.
(17) — Hallam, Europe in the Middle Ages, chap. 9. Adams, Civ-
ilization During the Middle Ages (N. Y., 1894), pp. 279, 280.
(18) — Turner, History of the Anglo-Saxons, III, p. 115,
(19)— Ashley, English Economic History (N. Y., 1894), I, p. 115.
(20) — Seebohm, The English Village Community, pp. 82, 83, Pear-
son, History of England, I, Appendix C.
(21)— Knight, History of England (N, Y., Lovell), pp. 441, 442.
(22)— Cf. Bourne, English Merchants (London, 1866), pp. 65-68.
Grube, Heroes of History and Legend (London, 1880), chap. 13. Gib-
bins, Industry in England (London, 1896), p. 138, Stubbs, Select Char-
ters (1884), p 65, Idem, Constitutional History of England, III, pp.
595, 596.
(23)— Ashley, English Economic History (N. Y., 1894), I, p. 97.
(24) — Henderson, Germany in the Middle Age (London, 1894),
p. 417.
(25)— Green, Town Life in the Fifteenth Century (London, 1894),
chaps. 7, 8, 9. Stubbs, Constitutional History, I, pp. 425, 426,
(26) — Cf, Janssen, History of the German People, II, pp. 1-3.
Turner, History of the Anglo-Saxons, III, p. 105. Hallam,' Europe in
the Middle Ages, chap. 9 Traill, Social England (N. Y., 1898), I, p.
207. Ashley, English Economic History (N. Y., 1898), II, p. 219.
(27)— Gross, The Gild Merchant (Oxford, 1890), I, pp, 5-8, Cf.
Traill, Social England (N. Y., 1897), II, pp. 109, 265, 556,
(28)— Gross, The Gild Merchant, I, p. 107.
(29)— Cf. Green, Town Life in the Fifteenth Century, I, pp. 53, 54.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION. 277
(30)— Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, I, p. 633.
ViNOGRADOFF, Villainage in England, p. 86.
(81)— Cf. Traill, Social England, II, p. 111.
(32)— Green, Town Life, I, pp. 53, 54.
(33)— Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages (N. Y., Put-
nanis), p. 338. Ashley English Economic History, II, p. 100. Traill,
Social England, II, 556.
(34)— Rogers, English Agric. and Prices, I, p. 530.
(35)— Idem, Work and Wages, p. 338. Green, Town Life, II, p. 66f.
(36)— Gross, The Gild Merchant, I, p. 116.
(37)— ViNOGRADOFF, Villainage, pp. 178, 291, 306. Cf. Eng. Hist.
Review, XV, The Disappearance of English Serfdom.
(38)— Cf. Gross, The Gild Merchant, I, p. 51. Rogers, Work and
Wages, pp. 339, 340. Idem, Agric. and Prices, IV, pp. 106-109. Cun-
ningham, English Industry, etc., I, pp. 440, 453. Traill, Social Eng-
land (N. Y., 1898), III, p 121. Ashley, Eng. Econ. Hist., II, 169.
(39) — Cunningham, English Industry, I, p. 506f. Ashley, Eng.
Econ. Hist., I, p. 92. Idem, The English Woolen Industry (American
Economic Asso., 1887), pp. 45-53, 75-84. Cf. Eng. Hist. Review, XII, p.
437f.
(40)— Green, Town Life, II, chap. 4. Webb, History of Trade
Unionism (London, 1894), p. 37, note.
(41)— Ashley, Eng. Econ. Hist., I, p. 103. Cf. Eng. Hist. Re-
view, V, p. 652. Gross, The Gild Merchant, I, p. 125. Green, Short
History of the English People, Book 4, sec. 4. Idem, History of the
English People, Book 5, chap. 1. Guizot, Civilization in Europe, Lect.
13. Traill, Social England, II, pp. 397, 407.
(42)— Rogers, Work and Wages, p. 360. Cf. Adams, Civilization
and Decay (N. Y., 1897), chap. 7.
(43)— Trevelyan, England in the Age of Wikliffe (London, 1899),
p. 170.
(44)— Wikliffe, Select English Works (Oxford, 1869-1871. Ar-
nold's ed.). Ill, pp. 216, 217.
(45) — Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws' of England (N.
Y., 1890. Chase's ed.), p. 423. Cf. Froude, History of England (N.
Y., 1873), I, p. 328f. Baird, Rise of the Huguenots of France (N. Y.),
I, p. 61f.
(46)— Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic (Phila., McKay), I, p. 77.
(47)— Idem, p. 272.
(48)— Green, Hist, of the Eng. People, Book 6, chap. 1.
(49) — Idem, Book 6, chap. 5.
(50)— Idem, Book 7, chap. 2.
(51)— Bagehot, The English Constitution (N. Y., 1890), pp. 19,
20. Cf. Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since 1814 (N. Y.,
1900. Macvane's ed.), pp. 19, 20.
278 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
(52) — Macaulay, Miscellanies, on Nugent's Hampden, pars. 107,
108. Cf. Hallam, Constitutional History of England (N. Y., 1880), I,
pp. 597, 610.
(53)— Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century (N. Y., 1888),
I, p. 203.
(54) — Gardiner, History of England (London, 1884), IX, p. 158.
(55) — Latimer, First Sermon Before Edward VI (Parker Soc).
(56) — Green, History of the English People, Book 5, chap. 1.
(57) — Latimer, First Sermon, etc.
(58) — See the conservative estimate of the cost of Columbus' first
voyage in Fiske, The Discovery of America (Boston, 1896), I, pp.
418, 419.
(59)— Cf. Fiske, The Beginnings of New England (Boston, 1900),
p. 80. Cf. Bradford, History of Plimouth Plantation (Mass. State ed.,
Boston).
(60) — Cf. on American social cleavage, the following: Eggleston,
The Transit of Civilization (N. Y., 1901), p. 294f. Fisher, The Colo-
nial Era (N. Y., 1897), pp. 61, 75, 109, 159, 253, 254. McCrady, South
Carolina Under the Proprietary Government (N. Y., 1897), p. 477f.
Idem, South Carolina Under the Royal Government (N. Y., 1901), pp.
143f, 399f. Mereness, Maryland as a Proprietary Province (N. Y., 1901),
chap. 5. Browne, Maryland (Boston, 1884), pp. 179-183. Weeden, Eco-
nomic and Social History of New England (Boston, 1890), I, pp. 84,
85, 99, 149, 400 ; II, 449, 520, 763, .834. Bruce, Economic History of
Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (N. Y., 1896), I, p. 572; II, pp.
If, 57f. McMaster, History of the People of the United States' (N.
Y., 1900), V, chaps. 43 and 44.
(61)— Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century (N. Y., 1888),
I, p. 209. Cf. Harrison, Description of England, Book 3, chap. 4.
(62) — Macaulay, History of England, chap. 19. Cf. Traill, Social
England, IV, pp. 115, 116.
(63)— Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century (N. Y., 1887),
VI, p 216.
(64)— Traill, Social England (N. Y., 1899), V. pp. 461-463. Cf.
Smiles, Lives of the Engineers, chap. 8.
(65) — Green, History of the English People, Book 9, chap. 3.
(66)— Traill, Social England, V, p. 323.
(67) — Green, as above. Cf. The Dictionary of National Biography
(English), under the names "Watt," "Brindley," "Bridgewater," "Roe-
buck," etc., etc., for important material relative to social cleavage. One
who can read between the lines will find this Dictionary a mine of
suggestion. The, general sociological value of biography does not seem
to be fully appreciated as yet.
(68)— Kidd, Social Evolution (N. Y., 1895), p. 286.
(69)— Contemporary Review, July, 1890.
(70)— Forum, Dec, 1893.
CHAPTER VIII.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION (CONTINUED).
§ 166. — For the last three centuries the great human
tide has been setting across the Atlantic. Hardly paus-
ing on the eastern coasts of America, it has flowed on into
the West, sweeping the Indian before it. When the great
modern exodus began, all the best land in Europe had been
appropriated by the upper class; and the enclosure of
the soil there is now complete. In the United States of
America at the present time it is a simple fact that all the
desirable territory once open to the settler is locked in the
grasp of private right, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. It
is not that the present population of America is too great
for the country, nor that the country is settled up to its
full capacity; but it is that the unused land of America,
like the unused land of Europe, is appropriated, and held
at a price. The vacant building lots in and around cities
and towns, the empire of unused farming soil, the mining
lands whence metals, coal and oil are taken — all these
natural opportunities and resources are held on specula-
tion. The situation which has become chronic in Europe
is being reproduced in America. The enclosure of the soil
in Europe and America has been so well set forth by
Henry George that we quote from him. The passage re-
produced below was written as far back as 1883 ; and re-
marks about conditions at that time apply now with even
more force.
"Twelve months ago, when the hedges were blooming
I passed along a lovely English road. . . On one side
of the road was a wide expanse of rich land, in which no
plow-share had that season been struck, because its owner
(279)
280 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
demanded a higher rent than the farmers would give. On
the other, stretched, for many a broad acre, a lordly park,
its velvety verdure untrodden save by a few light-footed
deer. And, as we passed along, my companion, a native of
those parts, complained bitterly that, since this lord of
the manor had enclosed the little village green and set
out his fences to take in the grass of the roadside, the cot-
tagers could not keep even a goose, and the children of the
village had no place to play! Place there was in plenty,
but, so far as the children were concerned, it might as well
be in Africa or in the moon. And so in our Far West,
I have seen emigrants toiling painfully for long distances
through vacant land without finding a spot on which they
dared settle. . . There is plenty of vacant land on
Manhattan Island. But on Manhattan Island human be-
ings are packed closer than anywhere else in the world.
. . . The social pressure which forces on our shores
tl^is swelling tide of immigration arises not from the fact
that the land of Europe is all in use, but that it is all ap-
propriated. . . We still talk of our vast public do-
main, and figures showing millions and millions of acres
of unappropriated public land yet swell grandly in the
reports of our Land Office. But already [1883] it is so dif-
ficult to find public land fit for settlement, that the great
majority of those wishing to settle find it cheaper to
buy, and rents in California and the New Northwest run
from quarter to even one-half the crop. It must be remem-
bered that the area which yet figures in the returns of our
public domain includes all the great mountain chains, all
the vast deserts and dry plains fit only for grazing, or not
even for that; it must be remembered that of what is
really fertile, millions and millions are covered by rail-
road grants as yet unpatented, or what amounts to the
same thing to the settler, are shadowed by them ; that much
is held by appropriation of the water, without which it is
useless; and that much more is held under claims of va-
rious kinds, which, whether legal or illegal, are sufficient
to keep the settler off unless he will consent to pay a price,
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — {Continued). 28t
or to mortgage his labor for years. . . To the very
farthest corners of the Republic settlers are already going.
The pressure is already so great that speculation and set-
tlement are beginning to cross the northern border into-
Canada and the southern border into Mexico; so great
that land is being settled and is becoming valuable that a
few years ago would have been rejected — land where win-
ter lasts for six months and the thermometer goes down
into the forties below zero; land where, owing to insufifi-
cient rainfall, a crop is always a risk ; land that cannot be
cultivated at all without irrigation. . . There is not to-
day remaining in the United States any considerable body
of good land unsettled and unclaimed, upon which set-
tlers can go with the prospect of finding a homestead on
Government terms. Already the tide of settlement presses
angrily upon the Indian reservations, and but for the
power of the general government would sweep over them.
. . . We may see what is coming by the avidity with
which capitalists, and especially foreign capitalists, who
realize what is the value of land where none is left over
which population may freely spread, are purchasing land
in the United States. This movement has been going on
quietly, for some years, until now there is scarcely a rich
English peer or wealthy English banker who does noty,
either individually or as the member of some syndicate,
own a great tract of our new land, and the purchase of
large bodies for foreign account is going on every day. It
is with these absentee landlords that our coming millions
must make terms'' (1).
After reading this passage, written in 1883, it is in-
teresting to notice a paragraph on the editorial page of
The Ohio State Journal, for May 22, 1899, which observes
that "the increased demand for land has induced the gov-
ernment officials to expedite surveying and placing on the
market the remaining unoccupied government lands in
the West."
In the same connection an editorial in The Farmer's
Voice, Chicago, January 26, 1901, may be read with profit.
282 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
"The growing scarcity of land and the hunger of man
for a place he may call his own are never more graphically
illustrated than during one of those rushes for land like
the one in 1889, when the free land of Oklahoma territory
was thrown open to settlement. Who can forget the
mingled tragedy and comedy of that exciting time and not
pray that its like may never come again ! Yet there is in
prospect just such another scene of brutality, outrage and
murder, for at this moment thousands of men are waiting
on the borders of other vast areas of land, prepared to
make the run of their lives to secure the land soon to be
thrown open. This land comprises about 3,800,000 acres,
and is composed of reservations in Oklahoma ceded to the
United States since 1895 by the Wichitas and affiliated
bands of Indians, and the Comanches, Kiowas and
Apaches in the southern and southwestern portions of the
territory. . . The passing of the land of the people is
a sad moment in the history of our country. As we go in
and out about Chicago, travel through Illinois, or Mich-
igan, or Indiana, and see the millions of acres of virgin
land — land that never grew a crop, yet which is held at
prohibitive prices — and consider at the same moment the
millions who now are landless, and the new-born children
who are coming into times when there is left for them no
heritage in land such as awaited their parents born under
our flag — as we contemplate this condition we are com-
pelled to question the future. Lord Macaulay said that so
long as we had a vent in free land the safety of our nation
was secure, but he foresaw troublous times when the peo-
ple could no longer go out to the land and establish homes
for themselves."
§167. — The land problem has been ably treated by
Henry George. Earlier writers, among whom were
Thomas Spence (1775) and Patrick Dove (1850), have
dealt with the problem to the same issue (2); but Mr.
George will always justly stand out as the greatest student
of the subject. The principal differences between his ap-
prehension of the problem and our view of it arise out of
WESTERN CIVILIZA TION — ( Continued) . 283
historical facts over which no theories can ride. Mr.
George discusses the land problem with no systematic ref-
erence to history ; while, according to the view held by the
writer, the land problem is correctly apprehended only in
an evolutionary setting. Mr. George developed his views
at a time when the newer conceptions of history and of
society had not acquired the depth and breadth which they
now have. Much excellent work on the source-materials
of history, which had not been accomplished when Mr.
George formed his ideas, have been at our disposal. It is
quite possible to discuss the land problem in its contem-
porary bearings, without reference to the past ; and it is in
this practical respect, we think, that the services of Mr.
George will be appraised by posterity.
Mr. George's presentation of the land problem was
confused with an inadmissible individualism. In harmony
with conventional, orthodox economics of the old school,
he assumed that capital possesses, or ought to possess,
only an individualistic significance. He was tacitly in the
position of imagining individual producers peacefully at
work through all ages developing the earth's resources,
and reserving part of their products in the form of capital,
as an aid to future production. If he had been interrupted
in the midst of an individualistic argument by a student
of social cleavage, he was in the position of brushing aside
such an interruption with the remark, "If capital has not
been freely accumulated by individuals it ought to have
been." Over against the background of individualism, he
introduces the central villain, the landowner, who spoils
the play; and we see ground rents ascending into the
regions where the landowner dwells, a useless creature,
devouring the earnings of capitalists and laborers in lux-
ury and riotous living. We are asked to take this a priori
account of the situation as a true picture of the real world
in which we live. The treatment is wholly statical. There
is nothing said about the historical conditions reckoned
with in the present inquiry. Mr. George's writings are not
calculated to give the reader any appreciation of the vast
284 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
and various capital existing in society. "The value of a
building/' he says, "like the value of goods, or of anything
properly styled wealth, is produced by individual exertion,
and therefore properly belongs to the individual" (3). It
is true that most of the wealth of society belongs to the
individual ; but how much of the wealth of society derives
its origin and significance from the individuals who own
it? It is hard to see how any single taxer whose attention
has been adequately directed upon the facts of history can
remain an individualist. Unless we are preoccupied, how
can we fail to see that there is rolled up across the cen-
turies an ever increasing mass of capital which is largely
formed upon the lines of cleavage? How can we fail to
see that the further society advances along the path of
progress and of time, the more it comes under bonds to the
past, and the less is its capital due to the labor of indi-
viduals living at the moment? Mr. George did not notice
the social nature of capital ; nor did he reckon with cleav-
age as an element in the capitalization of society. He did
not emphasize that the owners of capital have mostly
saved it, not out of their own labor, but out of the labor of
the lower class. He missed the fact that society is a col-
lectivism developing under the forms of individualism;
and he took the current individualistic psychology of so-
ciety at its face value without going beneath the form to
the substance.
Mr. George also mingled with his economics inad-
missible propositions about "absolute ethics," which must
be ignored in order to reach the essence of his work. He
was at his strongest when he said nothing about absolute
ethics, and confined himself to the contemporary economics
of the land problem. He was at his weakest when he
trenched upon those profound problems of conduct which
have baffled philosophical thinkers far greater than he.
When Mr. George was in the ethical frame of mind, he
imagined that the future adjustment of the land prob-
lem would be based upon grounds of "absolute ethics."
Private appropriation of rent for the use of the land.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 285
which no man has created, thought Mr. George, is abso-
lutely wrong under any and all circumstances. Slavery
likewise ought never to have existed. That great social
cleavage which is revealed by history ought never to have
been found among men. No good comes from it. From
the earliest age onward, according to Mr. George, human
society ought to have been organized under a democratic,
individualistic system wherein every man possessed his in-
alienable "rights." Mr. George's presentation of the land
problem, then, was mixed with much archaic ethical phi-
losophy. He worked in a transition era ; and belonged at
once to the present and the past. Any future adjustment
of the land problem will be based, not upon "absolute
ethics," but upon the solid grounds of contemporary ex-
pediency where Mr. George was strongest.*
The land problem has been so ably treated by Mr.
George and others that there is no excuse for going into it
here at any length. Ample presentations of it are con-
tained in the works whereof a list will be found in the
bibliography at the rear of this book. The brief treatment
which follows can do no more than suggest the situation.
§ 168. — The existing social regime places land in the
same category as things produced from the earth's re-
sources by human labor; and attempts to tax land on the
assumption that there is no difference between property in
the earth and property in things produced from the
earth's resources. It is a natural and legitimate result
of this system that speculation in unused land is encour-
aged. As population multiplies and spreads out, the re-
duction of the soil to private ownership runs ahead of the
actual needs of settlement ; and presently the society finds
itself in the midst of a complete land monopoly.
Land being thus treated as an object which may be ex-
changed for other objects, or sold for a cash price, or
leased, or taxed, like any other item of property, it follows
that there is a constant pressure to realize from land as
* Expediency will secure for men those rights which some philoso-
phers imagine to be inherent and absolute. '
286 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
much rent as possible. The selling price of land is cal-
culated, in the long run, with reference to the rent that
can be got for it. In the use of capital in all kinds of en-
terprize there is, first, a heavy private charge for land;
and, second, a heavy public charge by way of taxation. If
a capitalist undertakes to erect a dwelling house in a city,
and has no suitable building lot, he must rent or pur-
chase appropriate land whereon to build. Building lots^
like all other land, vary in price. We will suppose that
our capitalist pays |1,500 for a site. Some sites are worth
far more, and some far less. On a location commanding
$1,500 Avould be placed a house costing from two to three
times as much — say |3,500. This would bring the total
value of the property up to |5,000. Our capitalist must
now pay an annual tax on this total value. We will place
the tax rate at 2^; and suppose that the property is as-
sessed at tw'o-thirds of its value. This means an annual
payment of about |83. Thus, in order to erect a f3,500
house, our capitalist is compelled to pay f 1,500 for a site
and $83 annual tax in addition. This case illustrates a
universal fact. The earth being held as private prop-
erty, and assessed for taxation on the same basis as prop-
erty produced from the earth's resources by human labor,
all investments of capital must, in the long run, be made
to yield ground rent and taxes.
§ 169. — At the same time we must note the effect of
systems of taxation which, in harmony with our present
regime of property, throw land into the same category
with wealth produced from the resources of the land.
The testimony of experience is, that such systems
bear with greater proportional weight upon agricultural
property of all kinds than upon city property, and more
heavily upon the smaller holders of all kinds of city prop-
erty than upon the larger holders. Our study of the his-
tory of Israel showed us the crushing out of the smaller
land monopolists in the agricultural districts ; the concen-
tration of the property of Israel in the hands of the city
magnates ; and the dramatic protest of the country against
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 287
the city. The same process of concentration has been com-
ing to pass in western civilization in modern times. It
began earlier, and has proceeded further, in Europe than
in America; but its progress in America is more rapid
with each passing decade. The present system of taxation
causes increasing unrest and inquiry. In 1879, the State
of California, for instance, adopted a new constitution at
the behest of the agricultural classes, under which it was
expected that the rustic population would be relieved of
its disproportionate tax burdens. But as a matter of
course, the new constitution has brought no relief to the
class that voted for it. The experience of California is
that of all the American and European states. In Ohio,
Governor McKinley appointed a commission to investigate
the workings of taxation in that state. The commission
reported in 1893, showing that the agricultural counties
paid more than the wealthy city counties in proportion to
their property. The over-taxation of farmers, and small
property owners in general, in country and city, is elabo-
rately demonstrated by the 1894 report of the Illinois
State Bureau of Labor Statistics. The same fact, again,
is proved by an investigation summarized in a pamphlet
issued in 1897 by the United States Department of Agri-
culture (Division of Statistics, Circular No. 5). Mayor
Johnson, of Cleveland, Ohio, also declares that the smaller
property owners pay relatively more than the larger hold-
ers. In the course of a signed statement issued in 1900
after a careful investigation, he says :
"Small shops and homes, including the rented homes
of the poorer people, are assessed relatively higher than
any other real estate in the city. A great majority of
these small properties, valued at less than two thousand
dollars, are assessed at more than 60 per cent of their true
value, some being actually assessed at more than the own-
ers offer to sell the property for . . . The more valu-
able properties, those assessed at more than |2,000 each,
show great variations, and generally the more valuable
pieces are assessed at the lowest rates. . . The rule
^88 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
is almost universal that the valuable properties are as-
sessed low, while the least valuable are assessed high."
It is often claimed that this state of things can be
remedied by electing honest assessors. But while the evils
of a system of state revenue which places land in the same
category as other things may be palliated, they can be re-
lieved only by a radical reform of the system itself.
§ 170. — Let us now glance at the upper and lower
classes under the present regime.
We have seen that from prehistoric times down to the
present there has existed a vast lower stratum which has
never been a propertied class. At present, throughout
western civilization as a whole, the lower class comprises
the larger part of the community. It is personally free;
but in order to live, and provide for immediate bodily
needs, it must apply to the upper class, which owns most
of the capital and land of Europe and America. In other
words, the members of the lower class must compete with
each other for work. A small minority of skilled laborers
command high wages ; but this has no effect on the general
situation. The essential fact lying behind the relations
between upper and lower classes in contemporary society
has been so well set forth by Professor Small that we
quote from a paper by him.
"It will possibly be news to many men, who look from
the calm heights of professional position upon the strug-
gles of organized wage-earners, that only those children
who inherit a title to land or its use are born into a legally
protected right to earn a living. Other children may in-
herit money or equivalent personal property, and so long
as it lasts the law will protect them in its use. Then they
must apply, with the crowd born without inheritance, to
those who possess the land, for the privilege of working in
further support of life. . . A social system which in-
corporates the assumption that a portion of society may
righteously monopolize the productive forces of nature, so
that other men must ask the permission of the monopo-
lists to draw on the resources of nature, practically de-
WESTERN CIVILIZA TION — ( Continued) . 289
nies to the unprivileged class not merely a rightful share
of goods, but an intrinsic claim to any share at all. In
other words, it establishes at least two castes among men,
the caste of the propertied and the caste of the pauper-
ized. Failure to perceive the literal truth of these propo-
sitions is due to sheer weakness of the imagination. We
all understand that if a farmer is forced from his land,
the law allows him no claim to any other land except a
life lease of a place at the poor farm. We understand that
if a weaver or a switchman loses his job no law compels
another employer to hire him. Few men outside the wage-
earning class have fairly taken in the meaning of this fa-
miliar situation. If a bookkeeper, or salesman, or teacher,,
or doctor, or lawyer, or minister be thrown out of employ-
ment, with no title to land, and no property in stocks con-
trolling natural agencies, he is literally a man without a
country. Whatever his personal ability to extract the sup-
ply of his wants from nature's resources, the opportunity
is closed. He has no stock in nature. The resources of
the world are divided up among the members of the prop-
ertied caste, and the remainder of men depend upon the
members of this caste for permission to get a share of
nature by labor in improving nature" (4).
§ 171. — The present social problem in western civili-
zation (at least on its economic side) is now before us in
rough outline. We see the conditions under which the use
of capital in all kinds of enterprize must yield ground rent
and taxes; in which an ill adjusted revenue system bur-
dens the smaller holders of all kinds of property more,
heavily in proportion than the larger holders; and in
which the members of a vast unpropertied lower class are
forced to compete with each other for employment at the
hands of those who hold most of the capital and land of
the community.
Various interpretations are put upon this problem,
from diverse points of view. The only ones, however,
which can be accorded the merit of approaching the situ-
19
290 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ation from the standpoint of radical analysis are, we
think, two — that of the single taxers, and that of the so-
cialists. The discerning reader will perceive that the mo-
mentum of our general thesis carries us in between the
single tax and socialism. Concerning the latter we shall
have something to say presently. Meanwhile we turn to
the former.
§ 172. — The single taxer would shift the incidence of
taxation from wealth produced out of the earth's re-
sources to the value of land itself. In order to illustrate
this proposition, we may picture the capital and unused
land at the disposal of society as in the accompanying
diagram. If there were imposed on all land, used and un-
used, a tax equal, or approximately equal, to its market
value, the conditions confronting the investment of the
capital which society has accumulated would be far
simpler than at present. It would be manifestly impossi-
f
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 291
ble to hold vacant land out of use. It is not that under
such a regime all unused land, or even a thousandth part
of it, would at once come into use. But it is that the bars
now up would be down, for no person or corporation, how-
ever wealthy, could afford to pay taxes equal to the rental
value of property which was yielding no income. The lay-
ing of a tax on land up to its full value would be equal to
opening all unused soil to settlement and improvement.
We say nothing about the effect of such a measure upon
improved property, leaving that by the way temporarily.
Under the present method, the capitalist in the illustra-
tion already taken was compelled to pay, first, a heavy pri-
vate charge for improving the vacant land; second, a
heavy public charge annually in support of government.
Under the proposed method, the capitalist could improve
the unused building land at an annual public charge equal
or almost equal to its rental value and go free of taxation
on the improvements. To one who has not looked into this
question, it seems as if there is a juggle of some sort here,
in which some factor has been eliminated from the reckon-
ing. For such, we advise a closer consideration of the
facts thus far cited in connection with the problem.
§ 173. — The land problem really centers about the
question of capital; and the slogan of the single taxer
ought to be not "Free land," nor "Equal Rights," nor
^^Special Privileges to None;" but simply "Encourage-
ment of Capital." According to our general view, cleav-
age into upper and lower classes has been the principal
factor in the accumulation of social capital. Cleavage is
originally based upon personal ownership of the lower
class by the upper; and later upon ownership of the soil
whereon all must live. As population multiplies, the en-
closure of unused land exceeds the normal demands of
settlement. Presently we have a condition wherein all the
land is reduced to private ownership. At this point the
evils of cleavage as based on landownership begin to over-
balance its benefits; and we have the social problem of,
say, oriental or classic civilization, or present western so-
292 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ciety in Europe and America. Non-taxation of land up to
its full value, in contrast with heavy taxation of it, oper-
ates to discourage the freest investment of capital in all
kinds of enterprize — agricultural, mining, manufactur-
ing, commercial, domestic. Private property in land, as
identified with private appropriation of rent for the use of
the earth, is defensible only as a temporary basis of that
cleavage whereby social capital is accumulated. When
sufficient social capital has been amassed, the continued
reduction of unused soil to private and speculative owner-
ship interposes obstructions to the freest use of capital,
and makes the economic operations of society unneces-
sarily complex and cumbersome. The paradox of cleavage
in this regard is no extraordinary phenomenon to one
whose eyes are open to the antinomies of the world. "The
whole history of civilization," says Bagehot, "is strewn
with creeds and institutions which were invaluable at
first, and deadly afterwards" (5).
We do not claim that the single tax proposition is by
any means the full or final word on social reform. We are
talking simply about the central problem of the present
age, which we believe to be that of bringing Land, Labor,
and Capital together in the freest way.
§ 174. — The proposition that a heavy impost on land
values would stimulate the investment of capital is al-
most axiomatic. Under the present regime, people who
own, and people who borrow, capital are constantly in-
vesting it in all kinds of enterprize under the necessity of
paying, first, either annual or capitalized ground rent;
second, annual taxation. Why would not the investment
of capital by owners and borrowers be stimulated when
taxation is concentrated upon land according to its value?
This is not theory, but fact, as we shall presently see.
Such a measure would make it impossible for the specula-
tor to hold vacant land at a price, and would simulta-
neously make it possible for the owner or borrower of cap-
ital to invest it in all kinds of enterprize on far easier
terms. In the case already cited as exemplifying the pres-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — {Continued).
ent system, our capitalist, in order to erect a |3,500 house,
was compelled to pay, first, |1,500 for land whereon to
build and, second, $83 annual tax. Under the single tax,
he would have occupied the land, expended |3,500 for his
house, and paid an annual rent, or tax, of about |75 on
the site value of the location. The single taxer wishes to
universalize these conditions and open the vast empire of
unused farming and mining lands, and building lots,
around which there is now a high speculative wall acting
as a bar to the freest outflow of capital and labor in the
development of the earth's resources.
Not only is the proposition almost axiomatic that the
land value tax thus proposed would stimulate enterprize;
but actual experience goes far to prove it.
In July, 1892, the town of Hyattsville, Maryland, U.
S. A., introduced the taxation of land values to the exclu-
sion of all other local taxes. Before the new system came
in, speculators in vacant land predicted that the heavier
taxation of land values would simply raise the price of
land. They said they would add the tax to the selling
price of their lots, and shift the increase to purchasers.
But when the new system went into effect, they saw that
they could not afford to pay the heavier taxation on prop-
erty that was yielding no income. The expenses of the
town government were not large enough to call for the
complete single tax; but as it was, the tax rested upon
land values with sufficient pressure to force land upon the
market at lower rates. After the new system was intro-
duced there was determined opposition by land specula-
tors ; and an application was made to the courts for a writ
of mandamus to compel the town to return to the old
system of taxation. The State Court of Appeals declared
the new tax unconstitutional; and it was accordingly
abandoned. Respecting the operation of the system while
it was in force, the chairman of the Board of Town Com-
missioners is reported as saying :
"The practical working of the new system in Hyatts-
ville was beneficial. It has already appeared that it light-
294 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
ens the taxes of those most worthy of consideration. It
did more. Coincident with the adverse decision of the
Court of Appeals, all building came to a standstill, and
because of the return to old methods, the proposed con-
struction of buildings was abandoned. The sum total of
the value of all new buildings erected within the two and
one-half years since the forced abandonment of the new
system, does not exceed one-half of that of the year in
which it was enforced. There was no practical difficulty
in the application of the system" (6).
Perhaps even more startling than this instance is one
published in the Consular Reports of the United States
Government, in Volume 62, at page 407. Under the head-
ing "Land Tax in Kyao-chau," we read: "The German
Government has adopted the system of single tax for
Kyao-chau, levying a tax of 6 per cent on land values." It
should be explained that the place with the queer name
is a German colony in China. In this instance, as in the
Hyattsville case, the conditions are not wholly those of
the ideal single tax but the German-Chinese case ap-
proaches the proposed method closely. This looks like a
revolutionary policy for a supposedly conservative Euro-
pean government to take ; but it is a sign of the times. Re-
specting the steps leading up to it, Mr. W. McCrackan
writes as follows, in the National Single Taxer :
"A certain Major Wissmann is well known in Ger-
many as an African explorer. Some years ago he was
made governor of one of the German colonies in Africa.
. . Like all the other German colonies, with the ex-
ception of Kiautschou, Governor Wissmann's colony was
languishing from militarism and land monopoly com-
bined. The Berlin land reformers took this opportunity
to send him a memorial in which the crushing effect of the
great companies which owned vast tracts of land and held
them for speculative purposes was explained. Governor
Wissmann did not reply, but it is significant that, not long
after, he resigned his office, and gave among his reasons
^that he was tired of working for great land syndicates.'
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 295
From this point on I can only guess, but it is reasonable
to suppose that Major Wissmann, well known as an ex-
plorer and standing high in the councils of the colonial
party, should have been consulted when a new colony was
founded in China. . . If Major Wissmann was con-
sulted about Kiautschou, he who Vas tired of working
for great land syndicates,' the German government prob-
ably heard some home truths. At all events the method of
procedure was entirely changed in the new colony" (7).
Concerning the new system as finally established, the
German minister of marine is reported as saying :
"No colony has ever enjoyed such absolute freedom
of production and trade as we have secured to Kiautschou.
Not one single duty or tax will be imposed, except the tax
on land values. Not financial considerations as much as
considerations of politico-economical character have dic-
tated these measures. That the measure is popular is
proved by a petition presented to the British government
by the merchants, who are also the landowners, of Hong-
Kong, who, led by Mr. A. Mathieson, proposed the aboli-
tion of all taxes and the substitution for the same of taxes
on land values'' (8).
Under the local option law in New Zealand, 58 munic-
ipalities have adopted the "Hyattsville method" of land
value taxation to the exclusion of other taxes for the pur-
pose of raising local, municipal revenues. The general
revenue system of the whole country, in which system the
municipalities are involved, remains unchanged, so that
here, also, we do not see the unrestricted single tax. But
even on the present basis, after five years' experience, the
premier of New Zealand, Mr. R. J. Seddon, states that the
new tax has proved a success, popular opinion support-
ing it so strongly that its repeal is out of the question (9).*
* The city authorities of Glasgow, Scotland, backed by popular
vote, have asked the British Parliament for permission to adopt this
system for local purposes; and many other British cities have done the
same. At the fall election of 1902, a vote was taken in Colorado on a
law permitting local option on the question whether local revenue sys-
296 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
In April, 1892, the United States House of Represent-
atives appointed a committee to investigate the subject of
taxation in the District of Columbia. While we are on
this part of our subject, it is worth while to consider the
report of the committee. Strong recommendations in fa-
vor of heavy land value taxation were made. It should
be observed that one-half the governmental expense of the
District of Columbia is borne by the national treasury.
In 1892 the proposed revenue was about |6,000,000. The
committee reported that a tax absorbing one-eighth of the
ground rent of the District would supply the District's
half of the |6,000,000; that a tax on land values at the
rate of one-fourth of the total ground rent would supply
the entire |6,000,000 without calling upon the nation at
large for a single penny. And the committee went on to
say:
"The collection of 50 per cent would give, without any
tax upon improvements or any contribution whatever
from the national government, |12,000,000 of revenue a
year, or more than twice the amount the Commissioners
ask for — a sum which properly used would soon make
the National Capital the most beautiful and delightful
city in the world. And this could be done without the
slightest tendency to decrease the comfort or increase the
cost of living of any resident or visitor. On the contrary,
the very weight of the tax thus levied on land values would
check speculation and make land needed for buildings
much easier to be had by those who wanted to improve it,
an effect which in its turn would so increase population
and prosperity as to greatly increase legitimate land val-
ues and thus increase the fund that could in this manner
be drawn on for all District needs. . .
terns should be modified in the direction of the single tax. Newspaper
reports had it that the vote was heavily in the negative; but astounding
revelations of fraud in the count have been made, even an opposition paper
like the Denver Times printing damaging concessions. Interesting develop-
ments may be anticipated in this case.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 297
When it is remembered that the value of improve-
ments is constantly depreciating, and that of the total tax-
able value of the District, they constitute less than one-
fifth, amounting in round numbers to but |T3,000,000 out
of 1495,000,000, while the value of land, amounting al-
ready to 124,000,000 of annual rent, is appreciating at the
rate of over |40,000,000 a year, it would seem but simple
justice to do away with the burden now levied on the de-
preciating property, even though it necessitated a slight
increase in the taxation of that property so constantly and
so enormously appreciating.
If the National Government were to assume the entire
cost of the District Government, no one would be bene-
fited except the landowners. They could and would still
demand from tenants the full rental of land regardless of
the remission in the assessment on it, and the effect of this
net increase in the profits of land-owning would be to
raise the selling value of land and to greatly stimulate
land speculation. Thus the effect of such liberality to-
ward the Federal District on the part of the Congress
would ultimately be only to increase enormously a few
large fortunes and to drive a greater number of citizens
into narrower quarters and make it more difficult for
them to live. And if, while refraining from assessing land
values, still more lavish appropriations were made from
the proceeds of general taxation for the purpose of im-
proving and embellishing the National Capital, the effect
would simply be to increase a few great fortunes and to
hasten the crowding of the body of its population into
flats and tenement houses, and, behind stately avenues
lined with palaces, to raise noisome slums.
Already the effect of the growth and improvement of
the Federal District has been, by the increase of land val-
ues, not only to give hundreds of millions to a fortunate
few, but to increase the cost of living to such a degree as
to make it a serious question with many of the officers and
employees of the National Government w^ho are called on
to live here. And if this tendency continues not only will
298 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the salaries paid to employees of the United States soon
become entirely inadequate to the scale of living for which
they were intended, but the Capital of the American Re-
public must ere long present such a contrast between lux-
urious idleness and poverty-stricken workers as can be
exceeded in no capital of professedly aristocratic coun-
tries. . .
That the change we recommend in the subject of as-
sessment would powerfully contribute with the changes
we recommend in the manner of assessment to secure
equality, there can be no doubt. When, instead of being
distracted by various subjects of taxation, public atten-
tion is concentrated upon one, and that a subject which
from its nature cannot be hidden or concealed but can be
perceived by everyone who walks or rides along the pub-
lic streets, public opinion will be called in to secure equal-
ity'' (10).
During the investigation by the committee from
whose report we have made these extracts, the assessors
raised the reported value of land for taxation in the Dis-
trict of Columbia from |76,000,000 to $198,000,000 — an
increase of 160 per cent. This extraordinary measure
was probably dictated by fear of something more drastic.
Although it did not return even one-half the true value of
the land, and although the method of assessment was not
reformed, it naturally gave some relief; but large bodies
move slowly ; and, at the present writing, the single tax on
land values has not yet been adopted in the Capital City
of the United States.
The eighth biennial report of the Illinois State Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics, 1894, presented an exhaustive
study of the revenue question. It recommended the sin-
gle tax on land values as the only way out of many pres-
ent social difficulties; and its general treatment was as
positive and intelligent as that of the Washington report.
These reports are interesting and suggestive in con-
nection with the references to the experience of Hyatts-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — {Continued). 299
ville, the German-Chinese colony, and the New Zealand
municipalities.
None of the actual cases mentioned exhibits the sin-
gle tax in operation in its untrammeled form over a wide
social area; but they all tend to show, from the stand-
point of experience, what the single taxer claims from the
standpoint of pure logic — that the proposed method, if
once generally applied throughout a large part of civil-
ized society, would stimulate the investment of capital.
§ 175. — The single taxer, then, is in the position of
declaring that the present actual investment of capital in
ways most useful to the greatest number of people repre-
sents an under-investment as contrasted with what would
normally take place if social conditions were more per-
fectly adjusted. Let this under-investment be represented
by the letter x. Then the normal use of capital which the
single tax proposition contemplates will be represented by
X plus a relatively small quantity. The single taxer, in
last analysis, claims that the present social problem grows
out of the fact that the present use of capital x instead
of X +. He asserts that this minus use is the sign of a
maladjustment which throws the social machine out of
gear (or, perhaps better, which prevents the machine from
being better geared), and enables the upper class to ex-
ploit the lower class in the service of luxury.
This claim is so simple that it seems futile. But the
trouble is that we do not take a sufficiently dynamic view
of life. We look at society too much from the statical
standpoint; and we naturally and mistakenly seek dra-
matic social causes and solutions for dramatic social
problems.
Since capital is a product of labor, an artificial check
upon the use of capital translates itself into the unem-
ployment of an equivalent portion of the labor power of
society. The labor actually employed at any given time in
ways conducive to the greatest good of the greatest num-
ber may be represented by the letter x. The labor which,
if social adjustments were better, could be employed in the
^00 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
most useful way would, then, be represented by x plus
a certain relatively small quantity. This unemployed, or
poorly employed, labor — small relatively, but large abso-
lutely, and scattered everywhere in society — reacts upon
the entire labor situation. It is the so-called "surplus on
the labor market.'' The presence of this labor surplus has
a tendency to depress the wages of all labor employed. An
artificial surplus of labor is the correlate of an artificial
scarcity of work. We talk about "the market for labor f
and we tend to forget that there is a market for "jobs" as
well. An artificial scarcity of jobs, like scarcity of any-
thing else, raises the price of jobs. Laborers must pay
more and more to obtain jobs, or, what is the same thing,
accept smaller wages for the same work.
In this way, the labor surplus may be entirely ab-
sorbed into the industrial field. Labor may be universally
employed; — but employed on what terms? At wages
representing less than the expedient share of labor in the
industrial output. The increase of population swells the
ranks of labor, makes the price of labor lower, and the
price of employment higher; and alongside of splendid
and growing opulence we see a vast mass of under-paid
working people enthralled in wage slavery.
§ 176. — Common knowledge and statistics testify
that the wealth of western civilization is increasing stead-
ily. Yet statistics also make it certain that wealth and
landed property are concentrating in relatively fewer
hands, and that the power of the upper class over the
lower is increasing.
Respecting Germany, Dr. Charles Spahr, in his work
on the distribution of wealth, says :
"In Germany the degree of concentration is less than
in Great Britain or Paris, though each decade and each
reform in the method of assessing the income tax reveals
greater concentration. A dispassionate statement of the
change that has been going on was made by the late
Professor Eoscher (Political Economy, Book 3, chap. 7,
sec. 205). Between 1852 and 1873 the number of incomes
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— {Continued). 301
in Prussia assessed between |300 and |750 increased 175.5
per cent ; tlie number assessed between |9,000 and |18,000
increased 470.6 per cent; while the number assessed at
more than |40,000 increased 2,200 per cent. This dispro-
portionate increase of large incomes continues to the pres-
ent day. Soetbeer's table of Prussian incomes for 1890 is
shown to be obsolete, or worse, by the assessments for
1892-93. His estimates for the large incomes must be
doubled to conform with the newer tax lists. From these
it appears that a little over 1 per cent of those receiving
incomes hold more than 20 per cent of the income of the
kingdom, while 10 per cent hold nearly one-half of it" (13).
On the basis of the fortieth report of the British in-
land revenue department, and the British statistical ab-
stract for 1897, the following interesting and significant
figures are shown : In round numbers, one-half of one per
cent of the population owns over seventy per cent of the
real and personal property of the United Kingdom. On
the other hand, 92 per cent of the population owns less
than one-third of one per cent of the real and personal
property (11). Investigations in the city of London by
Mr. Charles Booth, ex-president of the Royal Statistical
Society, show that 31 per cent of the population are in
some degree dependent upon charity; that 51 per cent
support themselves upon the verge of poverty; while only
the remaining 18 per cent are in various degrees of easy
circumstances (12).
Concerning American holdings, we take the following
from the elaborate report of the Illinois State Bureau of
Labor Statistics for 1894 :
"A concentration of private land owning, the magni-
tude and the danger of which were never before ap-
proached in the world's history is to-day going on under
our eyes. Our methods of taxation stimulate and nour-
ish it.
It is the value of holdings, not merely their area, that
in periods of highly specialized industry like ours, indi-
cates the extent of land monopoly. The usefulness of land
302 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
is measured by its value. Thousands of acres in sparsely
settled regions are of little use, and consequently of little
value, in comparison with fractions of an acre at labor
centres; if the whole Desert of Sahara were monopolized
it would make but little difference either to the laborer or
to the monopolist, but the monopolization of a city busi-
ness block controls enormous unearned incomes. . Be-
tween Sahara and the best business block of the most
flourishing city there are many grades of utility, which
are expressed in corresponding grades of value. A lot in
the desert might beg in vain for a tenant who would pay
rent; a lot in the business block yields a fortune in an-
nual rent to its owner. Farms in populous places are
worth more than the sandy billows of a desert, and those
on the edge of towns still more, while lots in suburbs or
smaller towns are lower in value than those in business
centers; and so the values range; the difference in every
case being at bottom a difference of utility, a difference,
that is to say, in the expenditure of labor necessary to se-
cure under given circumstances a given industrial result.
Since this difference is measured by value, the intensity of
the centralization of land ownership must also be meas-
ured by value.
When this is done the enormous and growing extent
and the threatening character of land monopoly in this
•country may be quickly perceived and conclusively
proved. More than 75 per cent in value of American land
is said upon good authority to be owned by less than 10
per cent of the whole number of land owners. Or, to put
it in reverse form, 90 per cent of American land owners
own less than one quarter of American land. And outside
the top-heavy land-owning class, a large and increasing
mass of the population own no land at all'' (14).
The report then goes on to demonstrate that the obser-
vations applied to the United States in general are sub-
santially true of Illinois. We cannot pause here for de-
tails, and must refer the reader to the bibliography for
this chapter.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— {Continued). 303
From another standpoint, a writer in the Outlook
states the case for America thus :
"Half a century ago, when the first estimate of na-
tional wealth was made by the Census Bureau, the aggre-
gate value of private property, excluding slaves, was lit-
tle more than five billion dollars. Our population is now
but little more than three times as great as then, but our
wealth is more than fifteen times as great. Yet, except at
the South, the proportion of propertyless families is per-
haps greater now than then, and the poverty of the poor is
made the more distressing by reason of the contrasts in
economic conditions that have developed. The increase in
our aggregate wealth is likely to go on, and the Nation's
welfare depends upon whether the increase goes chiefly to
augment the power and luxury of those already rich, or
the independence, comfort, and culture of the rank and
file of the people. In other words, the problem before us
is to make the increase in National wealth synonymous
with the increase of National well-being" (15).
Nobody would be foolhardy enough to attempt to
show that the ownership of real and personal property is
now generally diffusing in the United States. The most
that is attempted is demonstration that wages are in-
creasing. But there is grave dispute even of this. Con-
cerning the summary of the famous Senate Report of 1893,
Dr. Spahr writes :
"The statisticians employed to summarize the returns
were to a hurtful extent in sympathy with the political
aim of the investigation. . . It is this summary that has
spread so much misinformation throughout the country.
Some of the more serious errors in the report are apparent
upon a casual examination. When any one at all familiar
with the course of wages in recent years takes up the re-
port, he is astonished to see that the wages of clerks in
stores have risen out of all proportion to wages in other
industries. In the metal works, as he would expect, cur-
rency wages are reported to have fallen since 1873 ; so, too,
in the cotton factories; but in stores, where the invasion
304 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
of women and girls is believed to have depressed wages to
an unusual extent, he finds it reported that an advance of
nearly 40 per cent, has taken place. If, to understand the
anomaly, he takes the trouble to consult the original data,
he discovers that for the metal works and cotton factories
the returns covered many establishments and many hun-
dred employees, while for stores the returns covered but
one dry-goods store and one grocery, employing together
less than 30 clerks. Yet the committee, in its table of
^simple averages for all industries,' made the uninvesti-
gated industry count as much as either of the thoroughly
investigated ones. And the committee did not stop here.
Despite this assumed rise of nearly 40 per cent, in the
wages of clerks, the table of ^simple averages' still showed
that currency wages had fallen 4 per cent, since 1873.
Thereupon the committee proceeded to make a table of
Sveighted averages,' assuming that the incredible ad-
vance of 40 per cent, in wages had been received by all the
clerks in the country, and that since these outnumbered
the employees in metal works and cotton mills put to-
gether, therefore the returns for less than 30 clerks ought
to outweigh those for more than 1,500 metal workers and
more than 3,000 cotton operatives. By this means cur-
rency wages in 1891 were made to rise one per cent, above
the level in 1873.
To cut short the criticism, in order to get at the facts
reported, it is necessary to throw away the work done by
the committee's experts, and return to the original reports
made by the employers" (16).*
* It is by methods thus exposed that men like Mr. Carroll D, Wright,
whom some people suppose to be a reliable authority, undertake statistical
demonstrations. Mr. H. L. Bliss, an expert statistician, and contributor
of statistical papers to the American Journal of Sociology and the Journal
of Political Economy, does not hesitate to call Mr. Wright a very serious
name. In his pamphlet on plutocratic statistics, Mr. Bliss writes : "To
Prof. Small's severe criticism Col. Wright has attempted no reply except
in a personal letter, to the publication of which he refuses his consent.
Yet Col. Wright owes it to the public, if not to himself, to answer criti-
cisms that tend to destroy confidence in our official statistics and statis-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 305
§ 177. — In his diagnosis of the situation here
sketched, the socialist lays down the proposition that the
poAver of the upper class depends mainly upon the owner-
ship and monopoly of capital. We have pointed out the
considerations that part us from the disciples of Henry
George; and we shall now call attention to those that dis-
tinguish us from the socialists.
The disciple of socialism correctly pictures the upper
class enjoying a monopoly of all, or most, of the material
capital in society — the factory buildings, and machines,
and tools, and appliances of all kinds. He then claims
that low wages and the industrial struggle for existence
are due to the fact that the members of the lower class,
possessing little or no material capital, are forced to com-
pete with and bid against each other for an opportunity to
labor in these factories and use these tools and machines
in support of life. According to the socialist, the last
word and final summation of private capitalism is the
Trust. "What is the Trust?" asks Mr. Daniel DeLeon, a
New York socialist. And then he replies : "The Trust is
essentially a tool of production. The difference between
the trust and the oldest style of privately owned tool, seen
now only in museums, is a difference, not of kind, but of
degree" (17). The diagnosis and program of socialism are
attractive and very dramatic. The upper classes own the
capital without which the masses cannot dig a living from
the earth. The lower classes, continually increasing in
number, bid against each other and force wages down to
ticians. Col. Wright attempts no answer because no other answer is
possible than the admission that he is the official liar of the plutocratic
class, and has faithfully discharged the duties of that office. The writer
sincerely regrets the necessity of using the harsh term 'liar,' but there
is no other word applicable to the case" (Bliss, Plutocracy's Statistics,
Chicago, Chas. H. Kerr and Co., p. 9). The same writer, in a recent
pamphlet entitled "Our Juggled Census," has exposed the fallacious
methods adopted in connection with the census of 1900 for the purpose
of misleading the public (The Purdy Publishing Co., Madison St., Chi-
cago).
20
306 ^A^ EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
the lowest level at which they can live and reproduce.
Ergo, society in its corporate capacity must seize the cap-
italistic plant. In other words, the socialist wants the
State, the people in their collective capacity, to assume and
operate factories, machines, tools, and appliances of all
kinds. Would he have the State seize the land? Oh, yes;
of course. We shall need land. The land question, he
remarks incidentally, is quite important in its way. But
the private monopoly of capital is the great underlying
cause, and public ownership the great cure, of the social
problem. Why talk about land? Anybody can get land
now! Why, you can get farm land for a few dollars an
acre.
§ 178. — Let us inquire how far Mr. DeLeon and the
socialists are right in their identification of the Trust —
"the last word of private capitalism" — with material
tools. The Trust, if Mr. DeLeon is right, differs only in
degree, not in kind, from the tools of the Rough Stone
Age. Let us see how far he is right.
The great steel trust is capitalized on a basis of one
billion, four hundred million dollars (|1,400,000,000).
According to an affidavit filed in the court of chancery of
New Jersey by Mr. Charles M. Schwab, president of the
trust, the earnings for the preceding year were one hun-
dred and forty million dollars (|140, 000,000). This is an
interest of 10 per cent on the figures given above ; so that
a capitalization of one billion, four hundred million dol-
lars is very moderate.
But let us see how much of this is real material capi-
tal. In the affidavit mentioned, Mr. Schwab gives an offi-
cial schedule of the steel trust's assets. From this official
schedule it is evident that something more than capital
contributes to the power of the steel trust. That factor is
land monopoly. The assets of the steel trust, like the as-
sets of the upper economic class in general, consist not
only of actual capital, but of large and exclusive landed
privileges. The schedule by Mr. Schwab consists of eight
items. The items into which the factor of capital princi-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 307
pally enters are as below ; but it should be premised that
even in these the element of land monopoly is powerful.
We italicize the factor of exclusive landed privileges, as
far as possible, in the items following :
STEEL TRUST CAPITAL.
(a) Plants, mills, fixtures, machinery, equipment, tools
and real estate $300,000,000
(b) Transportation properties, including railroads, (1,467
miles), terminals, docks, ships (112), equipment
(23,185 cars and 428 locomotives) , etc 80,000,000
(c) Blast furnaces 48,000,000
<d) Cash and cash assets 148,000,000
From which must be deducted, on a very conservative estimate,
at least the following items :
(e) Real estate (estimated from item "a" above) 50,000,000
(f) Exclusive land privileges implied in the articles "1,467
miles of railroads; terminals; docks" in item "b"
above} ., , 251,000,000
Leaving in round numbers an actual capital of about $500,000,000
Setting down the value of the landed privileges men-
tioned above, and adding the remaining four items of Mr.
Schwab's official schedule, we have :
STEEL TRUST LAND VALUES.
(a) Land values transferred from items "a" and "b" above,
as per items "e" and "f" $75,000,000
(b) Iron and Bessemer ore properties 700,000,000
(c) Coal and coke fields 100,000,000
(d) Natural gas fields 20,000,i)00
(e) Limestone properties 4,000,000
Making in round numbers a total figure for land values of
about $900,000,000
Thus we see that out of this enormous capitalization,
representing one billion, four hundred million dollars (f 1,-
400,000,000), the element of land monopoly is worth at
least nine hundred million (|900,000,000). The actual
material capital, although large and impressive in itself,
308 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
is small in comparison with the extent and value of the
landed privileges.
But this is not all. The land monopoly basis of the
steel trust is not only internal to it, and connected with its
own properties, but external to it as well. The Interstate
Commerce Commission of the United States has shown
that the trusts derive much of their power from special
favors and rebates from railroads. In 1898 the Commis-
sion said: "The situation has become intolerable, both
from the standpoint of the public and the carriers. . .
Tariffs are disregarded, discriminations constantly occur,
and the price at which transportation can be obtained is
fluctuating and uncertain. Railroad managers are dis-
trustful of each other, and shippers all the while in doubt
as to the rates secured by their competitors." Now the
value of railroads consists not only of the material cap-
ital in the cars, tracks, depots, roadbed improvements, etc ;
it consists even more largely in the state-granted privi-
lege of occupying strips of land running for many thou-
sand miles through country and city. Railroads are sim-
ply a special kind of improved public highway, or street.
This is recognized almost universally by courts of law.
The United States Supreme Court, for instance, in the
case of Alcott v. Supervisors, uttered the following
through Justice Strong:
"That railroads, though constructed by private cor-
porations and owned by them, are public highways, has
been the doctrine of nearly all the courts since such con-
veniences for passage and transportation have had any
existence" (18). Of the aggregate capital value of rail-
road bonds and stocks in prosperous times, it has been
shown that about one-half represents the franchise value,
or special privilege of running over long strips of land.
The report of the Interstate Commerce Commission for
1897 shows that on June 30, 1896, outstanding American
railroad bonds and stocks aggregated about ten billion,
^ye hundred million dollars ($10,500,000,000), this being
divided about equally between stocks and bonds. The sta-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — (Continued).
tistical report of this Commission for 1890 had said "that
in a rough way bonds represent the certain or rock-bot-
tom value of railway property, while stocks represent their
speculative value" (19). Thus we see that when the steel
trust and other trusts get special favors and rebates from
railroads, their power is to this extent based on land mo-
nopoly.
But this, too, is not all; for, besides their monopoli-
zation of natural resources and special railroad favors,
many of the trusts are sheltered by tariff laws. These
laws impose taxes upon the species of goods made by the
trust, and in this way either stifle competition by exclud-
ing foreign goods of that description, or increase their
price to the domestic consumer, and consequently raise the
price of the goods made by the trust.
And what, now, has become of the socialist claim that
the Trust is only a tool, differing in degree but not in kind
from the tools of the Kough Stone Age? How far is Mr.
DeLeon's proposition sustained by an appeal to the facts?
In opposition to the socialist, the single taxer claims
that the power of the trust, and of the upper economic
class in general, rests, not upon private capital, but
mainly upon private property in franchises to the exclu-
sive enjoyment of landed rights, including vast unim-
proved natural resources and railroad franchises. The
evolutionary single taxer claims that private capital is an
effect, not a cause, of cleavage. The conventional social-
istic treatment of private capitalism deals thus with ef-
fects rather than with causes.
§ 179. — In attempting to deal with the modern social
problem, socialism proposes:
Governmentalize everything : factories, fields, mines,
machines, tools, and railroads.
On the other hand, the evolutionary single taxer says,
partly in harmony with Henry George, and partly not :
Society is a collectivism, or socialism, developing un-
der the forms of individualism. Capital is almost entirely
a social product of past and present generations, and its
310 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
value should accrue to society in the largest possible de-
gree. — But by what means?
At present the lower classes are plainly exploited by
capitalists; and the larger capitalists, at least, are build-
ing palaces and living in luxury, while poverty is increas-
ing among the masses.
But the hurtful power of the upper class does not
rest upon the monopoly of capital, for, in spite of claims
to the contrary, capital is not naturally monopolistic.
There is, indeed, a vast amount of capital in society.
Without the material and intangible forms of capital, so-
ciety would fall apart, and revert to the primitive strug-
gle for existence, in which men were scattered about in
small groups, depending for food upon a precarious nat-
ural supply, and fighting with the lower animals and with
their own kind for the means of life. But although there
is a tremendous amount of social capital, it is not, and
cannot be, in its character as capital, aggregated in one or
a few monopolistic masses. Enthusiasts claim that the
larger and larger the mass of aggregated capital, the
more and more efficient it is from every standpoint. This
law, however, holds only up to a certain point beyond
which the greater law of diminishing returns limits the
efficiency of capitalistic aggregates. The largest possible
efficient aggregates of capital in society are small in com-
parison with the total mass of capital. This total capi-
tal exists (first) in the form of widely distributed ma-
terial plants, machines, and tools of all descriptions ; and
(second) in the form of a vast amount of technical knowl-
edge and training in the minds and bodies of many experts.
The socially hurtful monopoly enjoyed by capitalists
is due to the vast empire of landed privileges associated
' with capital. Three or four huge capitalistic establish-
ments, five hundred miles apart, cannot form a natural
monopoly in the absence of special landed privileges. But
connect them by long strips of land over which they pos-
sess exclusive rights of way; extend these rights of way
here and there all through the social mass; give their
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— (Continued). 311
holders exclusive possession of natural sources of supply
in the earth, so that they can, while working a small cor-
ner of a great field, prevent competition from developing
any part of the rest; — give capitalists all these govern-
ment-protected privileges; make the situation here de-
scribed universal ; and it will truly seem as if capital were
a natural monopoly. There is nothing to prove the so-
cialistic doctrine of the natural monopoly of private capi-
talism, for private capital has never yet stood on its feet
in human society without having its feet planted on some
form of special privilege.
Therefore, preserve the individualistic psychology of
society. Let individuals, under the spur of immediate self-
interest, acting singly and in voluntary associations as
large as can successfully be formed, — let individuals re-
tain the ownership and proprietorship of capital as a
matter of present social expediency ; but —
Kemove taxation from capital and all other forms
of labor products. Concentrate it upon the value of both
used and unused land, collecting for public purposes part
or all of the rent of occupied ground, and throwing unim-
proved land everywhere in country and city open to capital
at one charge, instead of two, as at present. At the same
time, tax railroads on the full value of their special and
exclusive highway rights ; and for their bare value as ma-
terial capital compensate their present owners, raising
the railway system to the plane of public ownership and
operation like other public highways. In the same way,
socialize the other industries, like the telegraph, street
railroad, telephone, street lighting, etc., which depend for
vitality upon government-protected privileges of laying
tracks and stretching wires over long strips of land. Let
society in its corporate capacity, acting through govern-
ment, hold open impartially to all comers the great public
lines of travel, transportation, and communication, per-
mitting no speculation in the resources of nature — no
corner in the vast empire of unused building, farming, and
mining land.
312 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
If these measures are judiciously introduced, there
seems to be nothing unreasonable about them. We have
seen the steps taken in several i)laces toward the single tax
on land values ; while the social ownership and operation
of railroads, as well as other public utilities depending
upon landed privileges, is a common and successful policy
in many of the most civilized communities, like Germany
and Australia. In order to effect a consistent social re-
form, however, the entire program should be instituted.
One part without the other is incomplete.
With reference to railroads, etc.. Justice Brown, of
the United States Supreme Court, says: "If the govern-
ment may be safely entrusted with the transmission of our
letters and papers, I see no reason why it may not also be
trusted with the transmission of our telegrams and par-
cels, as is almost universally the case in Europe, or of our
passengers and freight through a state ownership of rail-
ways, as in Germany, France, Austria, Sweden, and Nor-
way. If the state owns its highways, why may it not also
own its railways?" (20).
By some people the example of the United States Post
Office Department is made a matter of objection against
the governmental ownership and operation of railways in
America. The Post Office Department shows a deficit
which has to be made up from general taxation each year.
Here, it is claimed, is a fact which tells very strongly
against the governmental operation of railroads. But how
many such people know that the railways charge the gov-
ernment enough annual rent for the mail cars that it uses
to pay the cost of each car outright? Postmaster-General
Vilas called attention to this in his report of 1887. He
showed that the 432 cars then in use could be purchased
in open market, or duplicates manufactured, for about
11,600,000 ; and that the government was then paying the
railways |1,880,000 annual rent for these cars. He rec-
ommended government ownership of mail cars; but his
recommendation was not acted upon. In addition to this
exorbitant rent for cars, the railways also make an enor-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — (Continued). 313
mous overcharge for transportation of the mails. There
has been a postal deficit each year since Postmaster-Gen-
eral Vilas made the report mentioned above. After mak-
ing a careful inquiry, the New York World, on February
2, 1897, said : "The railroads of the United States are de-
frauding and overcharging the government to the extent
of $10,000,000 per annum, and this public plunder is going
on while statesmen and debaters at Washington are va-
cantly going about for means whereby they may avoid a
deficit of 18,000,000 per annum in running the post office
department" (21). Honest administration, based on the law
of reciprocal service, would convert the American Post
Office into a paying institution ; and the present mail rates
could even be reduced.
§ 180. — If the single taxer is right, the effect of his
program will be to cut the claws of monopoly. In order to
picture the effect of his measures, it will be well to recur
to the diagram above.
We see masses of material capital, money, technical
knowledge and training scattered over one end of a huge
field which represents natural resources. The application
of the heavy tax upon land values, and the removal of
taxes from capital, making it much easier to invest capital
than under the present system, is supposed to stimulate
men to invest their own and borrowed capital with more
freedom than at present in all kinds of enterprise —
farms, mines, dwelling houses, business blocks, facto-
ries, etc.
This, in turn, increases the supply of work, and ab-
sorbs the artificial "surplus" of labor which is now either
idle during industrial depressions, or employed at low
wages during prosperous times. Where the artificially
decreased supply of work formerly raised the price of
work, increasing the amount of labor which the workman
must pay for the opportunity to Avork, the case is now re-
versed. The increased supply of work on the "job mar-
ket" naturally forces down the price of "jobs;" and the
workman gives less labor for the same compensation, or,
314 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
what is the same thing, receives higher wages for the same
work. There are no unemployed, or partially employed,
laborers to bid against each other for a chance to work at
small wages.
At the same time, taxation being now adjusted ac-
cording to site value, there is no shifting of tax burdens
from the larger to the smaller owners and borrowers of
capital, as at present. We have seen that under the pres-
ent system farmers pay far more in proportion than do
city people, and smaller holders everywhere more in pro-
portion than larger holders. This reform in the collec-
tion of government revenue would therefore mean that
borrowed capital could be more quickly acquired in own-
ership than under the present system. Farmers and small
property holders would pay less to the State under the
single tax than they now pay.
At the same time, also, the increased amount of labor
products and money in the hands of the laboring people
would make them less keen for "low prices'' in the retail
stores, thus relaxing the jug-handled competition of retail
traders, and consequently of jobbers. Under the present
system, the retailer must resort to "sales,'' and adultera-
tion, and handle poor goods, etc. Likewise the manufac-
turer and jobber. Everybody knows how difficult it is to
procure good articles of certain kinds ; but everybody says,
"What are you going to do about it?" If the masses of the
working people had more labor products and money in
their hands, they would refuse to buy poor goods; and
manufacturers would have to make better goods.
After the inauguration of the single tax program, cap-
ital could be combined into the largest efficient masses;
but throughout the community at large there would be no
means by which all or a majority of capitalists could com-
bine to push prices up and push wages down. There could
be no secret rebates and special favors from railroads,
whereby a ring of shippers could combine and undersell
independent shippers ; for the railroads, as is now the case
in many civilized countries, would then be treated as im-
WESTERN CIVILIZATION— {Continued). 315-
proved public highways over which all must pay the same
toll. There could be no monopolizing of natural resources,
whereby only a small portion of nature is developed by a
ring of capitalists and the remainder of nature is fenced
away from other capitalists and laborers. Capitalists who
were developing, say, the one thousandth part of a great
coal field could not raise the price above a certain figure
without attracting other capital into the i^^-monopolized
fields. At present, the occupying coal company, or all oc-
cupying companies together, hold an enormous amount of
coal territory, work a small part of it, pay little or no tax
on the unused coal deposits, — yet hold these vacant de-
posits against other capitalists at a high price. If others^
choose to pay the price, these other capitalists know that
they must then submit to heavy taxation on the property
which they improve and develop. Under the land value
tax, the present holders and monopolizers could not afford
to retain the unused property; and other capitalists could
open new mines at half or less than half the present initial
expense. This opening of land, it must be remembered,
' would be universal under the proposed reform.
The situation can be condensed into even fewer words
as follows : Our present system of property and of taxa-
tion operates unconsciously to establish everywhere in
civilized society an informal Earth Trust. It is the Earth
Trust that lies unperceived at the heart of the present in-
dustrial problem. It is the Earth Trust that gives vitality
to capitalistic trusts. If the Earth Trust were abolished,
capitalists could not combine from one end of a country to
another for purposes of extortion. The self-interest of
capitalists would be turned against itself, and forced to
compete for the public good.
Probably it would not be necessary to tax land up to
its full value in order to collect sufficient revenue for gov-
ernment.
There is no present need for discussing the problems
that would arise in a single tax community. There will
never be a time in human history when there will not be
516 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
problems of some kind ; and we are here viewing the single
tax program as a step in the conscious evolution of
society.*
§181. — The state of the public mind with reference to
current problems is one of confusion. Perhaps there has
never been a more discordant medley of opinions.
Throughout a large part of western civilization the in-
creasing social stress has forced a further political devel-
opment. We have seen that the Clan State passed long ago
into the State based on property regardless of descent.
The nineteenth century witnessed the establishment of
manhood suffrage. Doubtless the twentieth century will
see womanhood suffrage likewise. This practical en-
franchisement of the lower economic class is a result of
the blind struggles of that class against the evils which,
along with the growth of every civilization, issue in lux-
ury at one extreme of the social scale and poverty at the
other. The social problem no longer finds expression in
theological terms. Church and State are either legally or
practically divorced throughout the larger part of west-
ern civilization — since disestablishment and the tolera-
* If the single tax is a wise program, it excludes all compensation
to landowners. In order to compensate landowners, it would be neces-
sary to issue bonds equal to the value of all the improved and vacant
land now held by private persons. It would then be necessary to pay
annual interest on these bonds equal to the present annual value of
the land. The usual amount of revenue for governmental purposes
would have to be raised also; and society would thus fare worse than
at present. We do not deny that the single tax would at first perhaps
tend to make a breach in the present ethical sense of society; but it is
becoming apparent that the present ethical sense of society is based on
very insecure foundations. The earlier single tax advocate said that his
program would conserve the present ethical sense. He said that no
compensation should be given for land because "the value of land is due
to no individual exertions or labors, but to nature and society." The
single tax argument shows that capital ought to be left in private hands
at present (and perhaps always), as a matter of expediency; but
capital, as our inquiry shows, is due as much to forces outside the in-
dividual as land values are. Conduct on the part of individuals or
society is right because it is good; not good because right.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION — (Continued) . 317
tion of non-conformity have the same social issue. It is
not necessary to set forth here the sequence of cause and
effect which has led to the separation of Church and State.
This is a novel fact in history. But the essential involu-
tions of the history leading up to it reveal nothing of nov-
elty in the working of human nature. If Church and
State were still united, the present social question would,
of course, take a theological form or flavor. Superfi-
cial observers, looking back on the present from the
future, would then put a theological interpretation on
strikes, tariff disputes, anti-trust agitations, trade un-
ionism, etc. But since the old regime no longer ob-
tains, there is no opportunity for the ancient inter-
pretation. It is natural that, on the whole, the enfran-
chised millions should be uncertain as to the proper ex-
ercise of their newly acquired power. It is natural that
the attention of the masses should at first focus upon cap-
ital rather than upon land, since capital is a more dra-
matic factor than land. Hence the growing popularity of
socialism in Europe and America. In the meantime the
great political parties, having exhausted their earlier is-
sues, reflect by their uncertainty the confusion of the pub-
lic thought. Despite the recent revelations of science, and
the spread of socialism, the psychology of society is, on the
whole, individualistic. There is ignorance of the essen-
tially collectivistic nature of society. Although everybody
walks about on the earth, and although everything that we
use comes from the land, there seems to be a profound
public unconsciousness that the social question has any-
thing to do with land.* From all that the psychology of
* The movement for the heavy taxation of land values is numerically-
far behind the socialist movement. It counts among its adherents Lyman
Abbott; E. Benjamin Andrews; Charles Francis Adams; Count Leo
Tolstoy; Hamlin Garland; Governor Garvin, of Rhode Island; Mayor
Johnson, of Cleveland, Ohio; Judge Moran, of the Chicago Bar. Two
of the great English Reviews — The Fortnightly, for January, 1899,
and The Westminster, for April, 1899— -have published outspoken.
articles championing the movement.
518 AN EXAMINATION OF SOCIETY.
present society reveals, one would think that history is,
indeed, "a ghost-dance on a floor of clouds.'' As the
twentieth century opens, all the characteristics of later
nineteenth century thought persist ; but signs are not lack-
ing that we are about to enter a new era.
(1)— George, Social Problems (N. Y., 1893), pp. 40-45. Cf.
Bryce, The American Commonwealth (N. Y., 1891), II, p. 717f. Cf.
Mackenzie, Introduction to Social Philosophy (Glasgow, 1895), pp. 99-
100.
(2) — Cf. Dictionary of National Biography, under names "Dove"
and "Spence."
(3) —In an article entitled "The Single Tax: What It is, and Why
We Urge it."
(4) — The American Journal of Sociology (Chicago), I, pp. 279-
281.
(5) — Bagehot, Physics and Politics, p. 74.
(6) — We take this case, and the quotation, from Mr. G. J. Bryan's
illuminating booklet, "Practical Effects of Advances in Tax Law," pub-
lished by F. Vierth, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1902, pp. 12, 13.
(7) —The National Single Taxer (N. Y., Jan., 1900), p. 5
(8) — From The Deutsche Volksstimme, through the Melbourne
.Beacon, Australia, May 1, 1898.
(9) — Cf. Report of the Special State Revenue Commission of Colo-
rado (Second ed.), p. 49.
(10) —Municipal Affairs Quarterly (N. Y., June,. 1899), p. 332f.
(11) — Cf. Financial Reform Almanack (Liverpool, 1899).
(12)— Booth, Life and Labor of the People (London 1892-1897).
(13) — Spahr, The Present Distribution of Wealth (N. Y., 1896),
pp. 83, 84.
(14) — Eighth Biennial Report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of
Illinois (Springfield, 111., second ed., 1896), p. 89.
(15) —The Outlook (N. Y.), LXVII, pp. 89, 90.
(16) — Spahr, Distribution of Wealth, pp. 106, 107.
(17)— Labor Library (N. Y., Oct. 1902), XII, No. 10, p. 3.
(18)— United States Supreme Court Reports (16 Wallace), p. 678.
(19) — Statistical Report of the Interstate Commerce Commission
<1890), p. 47.
(20) —Forum (N. Y.), XIX, p. 649.
(21) — Cf. the pamphlet "Finance and Transportation," by J. D.
Miller (Oak Park, 111., 1898). Cf. North American Review, June, 1902,
pp. 816, 817.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
This list is not intended for scholars, but for those readers who
desire a further systematic introduction to the general subject. It is
merely suggestive; and makes no pretension to exhaustiveness. The
works named can be found in public libraries, or can be purchased
through booksellers. Lists, prices, etc., will be promptly furnished
by Brentano's Bookstore, New York City.
A careful account of the beginnings and development of sociology
will be found in Small and Vincent, An Introduction to the Study of
Society. In connection with this the following handbooks may be
taken up. Spencer, The Study of Sociology. Fairbanks, An Introduc-
tion to Sociology. Ward, Outlines of Sociology. Giddings, The Theory
of Socialization. Idem, The Elements of Sociology. No exact order
can be given in which these, and books to be named below, should be
taken up. The reader should not limit himself to any one work; but
should use as many as possible, seeking a well rounded view. From these
works the reader should pass to larger treatises : Spencer,, The Principles
of Sociology. Ward, Dynamic Sociology. Idem, The Psychic Factors
of Civilization. Ross, Social Control. On the political phase of society
-see, in the following order : Wilson, The State, or Elements of Historical
and Practical Politics. Willoughby, The Nature of the State. Blunt-
scHLi^ Theory of the State. On the economic phase of society, see the
introductions by Ely and by Bullock^ and the larger works by Hadley
and by Marshall. On the domestic phase of society, see Starcke, The
Primitive Family. Westermarcke, History of Human Marriage.
Attention to the evidences for the evolution of mankind should
precede further historical study of society. For this use: Clodd, A
Primer of Evolution. Romanes^ Darwin and after Darwin. Conn^ Evo-
lution of Today. Morris^ Man and His Ancestor.
Passing to the prehistoric age of society; the following books will
be found of service: Clodd, The Story of Primitive Man. Lubbock^
Prehistoric Times. Idem, The Origin of Civilization. Keary, The Dawn
of History. Tylor, The Early History of Mankind.
Turning away from prehistoric society toward historic times, use:
Morgan, Ancient Society. Maine, Ancient Law. Idem, Early History
of Institutions. Idem, Early Law and Custom.
In taking up the earliest of the great historic circles of communities,
the two handbooks following will be found useful: Goodspeed, History
of the Babylonians and Assyrians. Breasted, History of the Egyptians.
These should be followed by: Maspero, Life in Ancient Egypt and
Assyria, Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt. Sayce, Babylonians and As-
syrians, Their Life and Customs. Reverting to the more strictly his-
torical treatment, the following larger works may now be studied: Mas-
pero, The Dawn of Civilization. Idem, The Struggle of the Nations.
(319)
320 BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Idem, The Passing of the Empires. Rogers, History of Babylonia and
Assyria.
Before taking up the study of Israel's history and religion, it is
necessary to consider the origin and earlier development of religion in
general. The following books will serve as a good introduction; and
perhaps the order given is as good as any. Allen, The Evolution of the
Idea of God. The special chapters on the religion of Israel and Chris-
tianity in this work are insufficient, and may be passed over; but the
general treatment is good. Fiske, The Idea of God. Clodd, The Child-
hood of Religions. Brace, The Unknown God. Brinton, The Religions
of Primitive Peoples. Keary, Outlines of Primitive Belief. Menzies,
History of Religion. Geden, Studies in Comparative Religion. Robert-
son Smith, The Religion of the Semites. Barton, Semitic Origins, social
and religious.
The last two books in the preceding paragraph directly introduce
the general subject of the early religion of Israel. This is further treated
in: Budde, The Religion of Israel to the Exile. Montefiore, The Re-
ligion of the Ancient Hebrews.
By way of introduction to the history of Israel, us'e G. A. Smith,
Historical Geography of Palestine. Paton, Early History of Syria and
Palestine. Fiske, The Myths of Israel. Ryle, The Early Narratives of
Genesis. Gunkel, The Legends of Genesis. Robertson Smith, The Old
Testament in the Jewish Church. Ryle, The Canon of the Old Testa-
ment. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testa-
ment. The entire history is taken up in brief in : Wellhausen, His-
tory of Tudah and Israel. Cornil, History of the People of Israel. At
greater length in: Kent, History of the Hebrew People. Idem, His-
tory of the Jewish People. McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monu-
ments. See also G. F. Moore, Commentary on Judges, for material on
social conditions. H. P. Smith, Commentary on Samuel. A late mod-
ern translation of the Bible should be used in connection with these
works. For general reference, Cheyne and Black, Encyclopedia Biblica.
Hastings, Bible Dictionary.
The above works will furnish an introductory view of the vital
subject of prophecy in its relations to Israel's history. But a more special
study of the prophets is necessary. For this, begin with Cornil, The
Prophets of Israel. A more detailed treatment is found in Kirk-
patrick. The Doctrine of the Prophets. This should be followed by
Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel (Cheyne's ed.). G. A. Smith,
The Book of the Twelve Prophets. For individual prophets: Driver,
Isaiah, His Life and Times. Cheyne, Introduction to the Book of Isaiah.
G. A. Smith, The Book of Isaiah.
Turning to the classic civilization, a general view should first be
obtained through handbooks on Greece and Rome: Mahaffy, A Survey
of Greek Civilization. Botsford, A History of Greece. Pelham, Out-
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 321
lines of Roman History. How and Leigh, A History of Rome to the
Death of Caesar. Fowler, The City State of the Greeks and Romans. Bees-
ley, The Gracchi, etc. Larger works: Duncker, History of Greece. Cur-
Tius, same title. Abbott, same title. Mommsen, History of Rome. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic. Gibbon, Decline of the Roman Empire.
By way of preliminary to the study of Christianity in classic civiliza-
tion, use: Mathews, History of New Testament Times in Palestine.
Wady-Moss, Malachi to Matthew. A more extensive treatment : Schurer,
The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. Graetz, History of the
Jews. Leading out from Israel to Christianity: Toy, Judaism and Chris-
tianity.
On the critical treatment of the Gospels, see Cone, Gospel Criticism
and Historical Christianity. Bacon, Introduction to the New Testament.
On the life and teachings of Jesus : Stevens, The Teaching of Jesus.
Cone, The Gospel and its Earliest Interpretations. Fairbairn, Studies in
the Life of Christ. Rogers, The Life and Teachings of Jesus. Mathews^,
The Social Teaching of Jesus.
On the apostolic age, etc., the following are useful : McGiffert, His-
tory of Christianity in the Apostolic Age. Bartlet, The Apostolic Age.
Weizscacker, The Apostolic Age. Cone, Paul, the Man, Missionary and
Teacher. Bruce, Paul's Conception of Christianity. Sabatier, The
Apostle Paul. Ramsay, St. Paul, the Traveller and Roman Citizen. On
the general history of the Church : Fisher, History of the Christian
Church. Idem, History of Christian Doctrine.
An excellent introductory survey of western civilization will be
found in Adams, Civilization During the Middle Ages. Use also: Em-
erton. Introduction to the Middle Ages. Idem, Mediaeval Europe..
Thatcher and Schwill, Europe in the Middle Age. Although old,.
Hallam, Europe During the Middle Ages, is still valuable in connectioa
with other works.
On various countries : Adams, Growth of the French Nation. Kit-
chin, History of France. Henderson, Germany in the Middle Agjs
Idem, A Short History of Germany. Motley, Rise of the Dutch Re-
public. Blok, History of the Netherlands. Green, History of the Eng-
lish People. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England. For modern
European history in general, see the excellent single volume work by
Schwill, The History of Modern Europe, which contains useful bibli-
ographies. For European history during the nineteenth century: An-
drews, The Historical Development of Modern Europe. Seignobos, The
Political History of Europe Since 1814.
On economic history: Ashley, English Economic History. Rog-
ers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages. Cunningham, Growth of Eng-
lish Industry and Commerce. Gross, The Gild Merchant. Green, Eng-
lish Town Life in the Fifteenth Century.
*21
322 BIBLIOGRAPHY.
On American history : brief works by Thorpe^ Fiske. Larger
works by Schouler^ McMaster. See also: Ford, Rise and Growth of
American Politics. Johnston, History of American Politics. Wilson,
Congressional Government.
On present conditions and problems in western civilization, see:
Dawson, Germany and the Germans. Gohre, Three Months in a German
Workshoo. Spahr, America's Working People. Woods, Riis, and
Others, The Poor in Great Cities. Bosanquet, Rich and Poor. Wyck-
OFF, The Workers. Bryce, The American Commonwealth. De Rous-
siers. The Labor Question in Britain. Sherard, The White Slaves
of England. Bodley, France. Demolins, Anglo - Saxon Superiority.
Von Halle, Trusts, or Industrial Combinations in the United States.
Hyndman, The Historical Basis of Socialism in England. Dawson,
German Socialism and Lasalle. Kirkup, History of Socialism. Ely,
Socialism and Social Reform. Idem, French and German Socialism.
Bliss, Handbook of Socialism. Ely, Taxation in American States and
Cities. Wells, Theory and Practice of Taxation. Seligman, Essays
on Taxation. Shearman, Natural Taxation. George, Progress and
Poverty. Idem, Social Problems. Idem, The Land Question..
Leading periodicals — Sociology : "The American Journal of Soci-
ology" (University of Chicago Press). Socialism: "The People" (New
York City). Single Tax: "The Public" (Chicago).
INDEX.
(Note. — The numbers refer to sections (§§) — not to pages. In order
io Und authors quoted, look for names in lists at end of chapters).
Ahab, 75.
America, settlement of, 161.
and cleavage, 162.
Anarchists, 23.
Arabia, Southern, 17.
Armada, Spanish, 158.
Assyrians, 103, 104.
Australians, aboriginal, 11.
Baalim, Canaanite, 64.
Bridge water, Duke of, 164.
Canaan, pre-Israelite, 60.
Israelite conquest of, 61.
Canaanites and Israelites, 64.
Cannibalism, 10, 11.
Capital, 22.
contemporary, 165.
increase in Middle Age, 153.
increase in 16th and 18th cen-
turies, 163.
'^'Capital and Land" — diagram, 172.
Captivity, 104.
Church, Roman Catholic, rise
of, 137.
Christianity, rise of, 126.
and cleavage, 131, 137.
Cities, growth of, 33.
Class mobility, 146.
Classic civ., decline, 125.
^Cleavage, 16, 19, 21, 33, 34, 84.
and America, 162.
beneficent aspects, 38.
in the Captivity, 105, 106.
contemporary, 170.
evil aspects, 39.
in Israel, 62.
in western civ., 142f.
vs. individualism, 23.
Collectivism and individualism, 83.
Commerce, 33.
classic, 117, 118.
Commercial classes, oriental, 33.
Commutation of services for
money, 154.
Concentration, causes of, 87.
Conduct as cosmically determined,
96, 97.
Cyrus, 112.
Darwin, 11.
DeLeon, Daniel, 177, 178.
Dreams in primitive thought, 45.
Education, oriental, 37.
Elijah, 76.
Elohim, gods, the mighty, 59.
Ethicalism, origin of prophetic, 92.
Evolution, social, 1, 2.
materials for study of, 3.
and universal history, 4.
Exile, 106-110.
Fallacy, post-hoc, 99.
Famine, pre-historic, 10.
Fuegians, 11.
Future life, in primitive thought,
52, 59.
(323)
324
INDEX.
George, Henry, 12, 167.
Gideon, 65.
Gods, primitive, 46-49.
Golden Age, Israel's tradition of,
73.
Government, evolution of, 29, 30.
early functions, 31.
Guilds, 152.
Hovas, 17.
Hyattsville, Md., 174.
Idols, origin, 51.
Industrial revolution, 164.
Industry, oriental, 33.
India, Farther, 17.
Individual conduct and the social
problem, 93, 94.
Individualism and collectivism, 83.
Infanticide, 11.
reduction of, 15.
Israel, 40.
before the Conquest, 41, 42.
a Semitic people, 42.
early religion, 53ff.
Canaanitish, 65.
Canaanitish descent neglected,
65.
division of, 71.
Israelites and Canaanites, 64.
Jehonadab, 78.
Jehu, 77.
Jesus, message of, 128f.
psychology of, 130.
Jewish conditions, post-Exilic,
113, 114.
Jezebel, 75.
John of Gaunt, 158.
Journal of Researches, Darwin's,
11.
Judges, age of, 63.
Kingship, Israelite, passes from
country to city, 65.
Kinship ties, prehistoric, 7.
Kirkpatrick, Dr., 93, 94.
Kyaochau, 174.
Labor, mobility of medieval, 145.
Land, enclosure of American, 166.
problem, 168ff., 175.
speculation in, 84.
Malays, 17.
Manufacture, 33.
growth of in western civ., 150,
151.
Masai, 17.
Material progress, prehistoric, 14.
effects of, 15, 16.
Melanesia, East, 17.
Messianic hope, 127.
Micronesia, 17.
Middle Age, divisions of, 147.
Migration, prehistoric, 8.
Mobility of early labor, 33.
Monasticism, 139.
Moses, 56, 92.
Nehemiah, 114.
Old Testament, 43.
Patricians and plebeians, 121, 122,
Paul, 135, 136.
Perspective, historical, 28.
Politics, oriental, 29, 30.
Polynesia, 17.
Post-hoc fallacy, 99.
Proletariat, rise of, 156.
Prophet, primary meaning of the
word, 40.
Prophets, the, 40.
rise of, 68.
and monotheism, 102.
primarily social preachers, 89,
90.
individualistic moralists, 95,
98.
Prophetism passes from country
to city, 92.
Puritanism, 160.
Rechabites, 78.
Reformation, 157, 158.
INDEX.
325
English, 158.
religious aspect, 159.
Religion, origin of, 44ff.
Religion, social cement, 35, 50.
Religious phase of oriental civ., 36.
Resurrection, apostolic preaching
of, 134.
Rights, human, realized through
their denial, 25.
Roman religion, 47.
Sacrifice, human,, 58.
Schwab, Charles, 178.
Sinai Covenant, 56.
Single Tax, 172ff.
effects, 180.
Socialism, 177.
vs. evolutionary Single Tax,
179.
Society a collectivism, 24.
Steel trust, 178.
Tax, Single, 172ff.
Taxation, 32, 87.
Congressional report on, 174.
modern, 169.
Teraphim, 57.
Theology, New, rise of, 74.
first period of, 80.
Third Estate, oriental, 33.
in classic civ., 119.
in western civ., 148.
Towns and cities, growth of, 33.
in western civ., 149.
Towns, chartered, decay of, 155.
Trusts, 178.
Upper class, contraction of, 76, 86.
"Vine- and Fig-Tree Tradition,"
73.
Walker, F. A., 23.
War, necessary and unnecessary,
31.
prehistoric, 9.
Ward, Lester F., 38.
Watt, John, 164.
Wealth, modern concentration of,
176.
Wikliffe, 158.
Yahweh, the. god of Israel, 54, 55.
rise of, 67.
called Baal, 90.
Kenitic derivation of, 56.
imperialization of, 101, 102.
Yahweh-names in Israel, 79.
Yahwism, partial neglect of, 63.
mixed with Canaanite relig-
ion, 64, 69.
and "righteousness," 91.
Zealand, New, 174.
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW
AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS
WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN
THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY
WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH
DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY
OVERDUE.
ailflQ ^'^ W'^
MkW ^"^ *^''
LD 2 1-95 w- 7, '3 7
ht
y
^C 07573
2^ f
M
naiii I i