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