贝壳电子书 > 英文原著电子书 > second epilogue >

第5章

second epilogue-第5章

小说: second epilogue 字数: 每页4000字

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!



historians say that power rests on a conditional delegation of the

will of the people to their rulers; and that historical leaders have

power only conditionally on carrying out the program that the will

of the people has by tacit agreement prescribed to them。 But what this

program consists in these historians do not say; or if they do they

continually contradict one another。

  Each historian; according to his view of what constitutes a nation's

progress; looks for these conditions in the greatness; wealth;

freedom; or enlightenment of citizens of France or some other country。

But not to mention the historians' contradictions as to the nature

of this program… or even admitting that some one general program of

these conditions exists… the facts of history almost always contradict

that theory。 If the conditions under which power is entrusted

consist in the wealth; freedom; and enlightenment of the people; how

is it that Louis XIV and Ivan the Terrible end their reigns

tranquilly; while Louis XVI and Charles I are executed by their

people? To this question historians reply that Louis XIV's activity;

contrary to the program; reacted on Louis XVI。 But why did it not

react on Louis XIV or on Louis XV… why should it react just on Louis

XVI? And what is the time limit for such reactions? To these questions

there are and can be no answers。 Equally little does this view explain

why for several centuries the collective will is not withdrawn from

certain rulers and their heirs; and then suddenly during a period of

fifty years is transferred to the Convention; to the Directory; to

Napoleon; to Alexander; to Louis XVIII; to Napoleon again; to

Charles X; to Louis Philippe; to a Republican government; and to

Napoleon III。 When explaining these rapid transfers of the people's

will from from one individual to another; especially in view of

international relations; conquests; and alliances; the historians

are obliged to admit that some of these transfers are not normal

delegations of the people's will but are accidents dependent on

cunning; on mistakes; on craft; or on the weakness of a diplomatist; a

ruler; or a party leader。 So that the greater part of the events of

history… civil wars; revolutions; and conquests… are presented by

these historians not as the results of free transferences of the

people's will; but as results of the ill…directed will of one or

more individuals; that is; once again; as usurpations of power。 And so

these historians also see and admit historical events which are

exceptions to the theory。

  These historians resemble a botanist who; having noticed that some

plants grow from seeds producing two cotyledons; should insist that

all that grows does so by sprouting into two leaves; and that the

palm; the mushroom; and even the oak; which blossom into full growth

and no longer resemble two leaves; are deviations from the theory。

  Historians of the third class assume that the will of the people

is transferred to historic personages conditionally; but that the

conditions are unknown to us。 They say that historical personages have

power only because they fulfill the will of the people which has

been delegated to them。

  But in that case; if the force that moves nations lies not in the

historic leaders but in the nations themselves; what significance have

those leaders?

  The leaders; these historians tell us; express the will of the

people: the activity of the leaders represents the activity of the

people。

  But in that case the question arises whether all the activity of the

leaders serves as an expression of the people's will or only some part

of it。 If the whole activity of the leaders serves as the expression

of the people's will; as some historians suppose; then all the details

of the court scandals contained in the biographies of a Napoleon or

a Catherine serve to express the life of the nation; which is

evident nonsense; but if it is only some particular side of the

activity of an historical leader which serves to express the

people's life; as other so…called 〃philosophical〃 historians

believe; then to determine which side of the activity of a leader

expresses the nation's life; we have first of all to know in what

the nation's life consists。

  Met by this difficulty historians of that class devise some most

obscure; impalpable; and general abstraction which can cover all

conceivable occurrences; and declare this abstraction to be the aim of

humanity's movement。 The most usual generalizations adopted by

almost all the historians are: freedom; equality; enlightenment;

progress; civilization; and culture。 Postulating some generalization

as the goal of the movement of humanity; the historians study the

men of whom the greatest number of monuments have remained: kings;

ministers; generals; authors; reformers; popes; and journalists; to

the extent to which in their opinion these persons have promoted or

hindered that abstraction。 But as it is in no way proved that the

aim of humanity does consist in freedom; equality; enlightenment; or

civilization; and as the connection of the people with the rulers

and enlighteners of humanity is only based on the arbitrary assumption

that the collective will of the people is always transferred to the

men whom we have noticed; it happens that the activity of the millions

who migrate; burn houses; abandon agriculture; and destroy one another

never is expressed in the account of the activity of some dozen people

who did not burn houses; practice agriculture; or slay their fellow

creatures。

  History proves this at every turn。 Is the ferment of the peoples

of the west at the end of the eighteenth century and their drive

eastward explained by the activity of Louis XIV; XV; and XVI; their

mistresses and ministers; and by the lives of Napoleon; Rousseau;

Diderot; Beaumarchais; and others?

  Is the movement of the Russian people eastward to Kazan and

Siberia expressed by details of the morbid character of Ivan the

Terrible and by his correspondence with Kurbski?

  Is the movement of the peoples at the time of the Crusades explained

by the life and activity of the Godfreys and the Louis…es and their

ladies? For us that movement of the peoples from west to east; without

leaders; with a crowd of vagrants; and with Peter the Hermit;

remains incomprehensible。 And yet more incomprehensible is the

cessation of that movement when a rational and sacred aim for the

Crusade… the deliverance of Jerusalem… had been clearly defined by

historic leaders。 Popes; kings; and knights incited the peoples to

free the Holy Land; but the people did not go; for the unknown cause

which had previously impelled them to go no longer existed。 The

history of the Godfreys and the Minnesingers can evidently not cover

the life of the peoples。 And the history of the Godfreys and the

Minnesingers has remained the history of Godfreys and Minnesingers;

but the history of the life of the peoples and their impulses has

remained unknown。

  Still less does the history of authors and reformers explain to us

the life of the peoples。

  The history of culture explains to us the impulses and conditions of

life and thought of a writer or a reformer。 We learn that Luther had a

hot temper and said such and such things; we learn that Rousseau was

suspicious and wrote such and such books; but we do not learn why

after the Reformation the peoples massacred one another; nor why

during the French Revolution they guillotined one another。

  If we unite both these kinds of history; as is done by the newest

historians; we shall have the history of monarchs and writers; but not

the history of the life of the peoples。

EP2|CH5

  CHAPTER V



  The life of the nations is not contained in the lives of a few

men; for the connection between those men and the nations has not been

found。 The theory that this connection is based on the transference of

the collective will of a people to certain historical personages is an

hypothesis unconfirmed by the experience of history。

  The theory of the transference of the collecti

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的