Chapter XIII: European Society in the Eighteenth Century (2)

At times he was the idol of Paris, applauded by _philosophes_ and petted by the court, or again he would be a refugee from the wrath of outraged authorities. For a great part of his life he resided at Cirey in Lorraine,--with his mistress, his books, his half-finished plays, and his laboratory--for Voltaire, like all _philosophes_, had to play at science. Here he lived in constant readiness to flee over the border if the king should move against him. For a time he lived in Germany as the protégé of Frederick the Great, but he treated that irascible monarch with neither tact nor deference, and soon left Berlin to escape the king's ire. He visited Catherine the Great of Russia. He also lived at Geneva for a while, but even there he failed to keep peace with the magistrates.

Such conflicts with established authority only increased his fame. Moreover, his three years' exile in England (1726-1729) had been of untold value, for they had given him a first-hand acquaintance with English rationalism. He had been brought up to discount religious "superstition" but the English thinkers provided him with a well- considered philosophy. Full of enthusiasm for the ideas of his English friends, he wrote _Letters on the English_--a triumph of deistic philosophy and sarcastic criticism of church and society.

The opinions which Voltaire henceforth never ceased to expound had long been held by English rationalists. He combined (1) admiration for experimental science with (2) an exalted opinion of his own ability to reason out the "natural laws" which were supposed to lie at the base of human nature, religion, society, the state, and the universe in general. (3) He was a typical Deist, thinking that the God who had made the myriad stars of the firmament and who had promulgated eternal laws for the universe, would hardly concern Himself with the soul of Pierre or Jean. To him all priests were impostors, and sacraments meaningless mummery, and yet he would not abolish religion entirely. Voltaire often said that he believed in a "natural religion," but never explained it fully. Indeed, he was far more interested in tearing down than in building up, and disposed rather to scoff at the priests, teachings, and practices of the Catholic Church than to convert men to a better religion. (4) Likewise in his criticism of government and of society, he confined himself mostly to bitter denunciations of contemporaneous conditions, without offering a substitute or suggesting practical reforms. His nearest approach to the practical was his admiration for English institutions, but he never explained how the "liberties" of England were to be transplanted into France.

Voltaire was not an acutely original thinker. Nevertheless, his innumerable tragedies, comedies, histories, essays, and letters established his reputation as the most versatile and accomplished writer of his age. But all the "hundred volumes" of Voltaire are rarely read today. They are clever, to be sure, witty, graceful,--but admittedly superficial. He thought that he could understand at a glance the problems upon which more earnest men had spent their lives; he would hurriedly dash off a tragedy, or in spare moments write a pretentious history. He was not always accurate but he was always clever.

Let us remember him as, at the age of eighty-four, he pays a famous visit to Paris,--a sprightly old man with wrinkled face, and with sharp old eyes peering out from either side of the long nose, beaming with pride at the flattery of his admirers, sparkling with pleasure as he makes a witty repartee. The ladies call him a most amusing old cynic. Cynic he is, and old. His life work has been scoffing. Yet Voltaire is unquestionably the intellectual dictator of Europe. His genius for satire and his fearless attacks on long-standing abuses have made him hated, and feared, and admired. He has given tone and character to the Old Régime.

[Sidenote: Diderot and the Encyclopedists]

Voltaire was not alone in the work of spreading discontent. Less famous but hardly less brilliant or versatile, was Denis Diderot (1713-1784). His great achievement was the editing of the _Encyclopedia_. The gathering of all human knowledge into one set of volumes--an encyclopedia--had been for generations a favorite idea in Europe. Diderot associated with himself the most distinguished mathematicians, astronomers, scientists, and philosophers of the time in the compilation of a work which in seventeen volumes [Footnote: Not counting pictorial supplements.] undertook to summarize the latest findings of the scholarship of the age. Over four thousand copies had been subscribed when the _Encyclopedia_ appeared in 1765. It proved to be more than a monument of learning: it was a manifesto of radicalism. Its contributors were the apostles of rationalism and deism, [Footnote: Some went even further and practically denied the existence of God.] and their criticism of current ideas about religion, society, and science won many disciples to the new ideas.

The mission of Voltaire and the Encyclopedists (as the editors of the _Encyclopedia_ are called) was to disseminate knowledge and to destroy prejudice, especially in religion. Practical specific reforms were suggested by Montesquieu, Rousseau, Beccaria, and Adam Smith.

[Sidenote: Montesquieu]

Montesquieu (1689-1755), a French lawyer-nobleman, a student of natural science, and an admirer of Newton, was the foremost writer of the eighteenth century on the practice of government. In his _Persian Letters_, and more especially in _The Spirit of the Laws_ (1748), he argued that government is a complicated matter and, to be successful, must be adapted to the peculiarities of a particular people. Theoretically he preferred a republic, and the Constitution of the United States consciously embodied many of his theories. Practically, he considered the government of Great Britain very admirable, and although it sheltered many abuses, as we shall presently see, [Footnote: See below, pp. 432 ff.] nevertheless he urged the French to pattern their political organization after it. Moderation was the motto of Montesquieu.

[Sidenote: Rousseau]

A more radical reformer was Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). In his life Rousseau was everything he should not have been. He was a failure as footman, as servant, as tutor, as secretary, as music copier, as lace maker. He wandered in Turin, Paris, Vienna, London. His immorality was notorious,--he was not faithful in love, and his children were sent to a foundling asylum. He was poverty-stricken, dishonest, discontented, and, in his last years, demented.

Yet this man, who knew so little how to live his own life, exercised a wonderful influence over the lives of others. Sordid as was his career, the man himself was not without beautiful and generous impulses. He loved nature in an age when other men simply studied nature. He liked to look at the clear blue sky, or to admire the soft green fields and shapely trees, and he was not ashamed to confess it. The emotions had been forgotten while philosophers were praising the intellect: Rousseau reminded the eighteenth century that after all it may be as sane to enjoy a sunset as to solve a problem in algebra. Rousseau possessed the soul of a poet.

To him right feeling was as important as right thinking, and in this respect he quarreled with the rationalists who claimed that common sense alone was worth while. Rousseau was a Deist--at most he believed but vaguely in a "Being, whatever He may be, Who moves the universe and orders all things." But he detested the cold reasoning of philosophers who conceived of God as too much interested in watching the countless stars obey His eternal laws, to stoop to help puny mortals with their petty affairs. "0 great philosophers!" cried Rousseau, "How much God is obliged to you for your easy methods and for sparing Him work." And again Rousseau warns us to "flee from those [Voltaire and his like] who, under the pretense of explaining nature, sow desolating doctrines in the hearts of men, and whose apparent skepticism is a hundred times more ... dogmatic" than the teachings of priests. Rousseau was not an orthodox Christian, nor a calmly rational Deist; he simply felt that "to love God above all things, and your neighbor as yourself, is the sum of the law."

This he reproached the philosophers with not doing. Rousseau had seen and felt the bitter suffering of the poor, and he had perceived the cynical indifference with which educated men often regarded it. Science and learning seemed to have made men only more selfish. Indeed, the ignorant peasant seemed to him humbler and more virtuous than the pompous pedant. In a passionate protest--his _Discourse on Arts and Sciences_ (1749)--Rousseau denounced learning as the badge of selfishness and corruption, for it was used to gratify the pride and childish curiosity of the rich, rather than to right the wrongs of the poor.

In fact, it were better, he contended, that all men should be savages, than that a few of the most cunning, cruel, and greedy should make slaves of the rest. His love of nature, his contempt for the silly showiness and shallow hypocrisy of eighteenth-century society, made the idea a favorite one. He loved to dream of the times [Footnote: It must be confessed that here Rousseau was dreaming of times that probably never existed.] when men were all free and equal, when nobody claimed to own the land which God had made for all, when there were no wars to kill, no taxes to oppress, no philosophers to deceive the people.

In an essay inquiring _What is the Origin of Inequality among Men_ (1753), Rousseau sought to show how vanity, greed, and selfishness had found lodgment in the hearts of these "simple savages," how the strongest had fenced off plots of land for themselves and forced the weak to acknowledge the right of private property. This, said Rousseau, was the real origin of inequality among men, of the tyranny of the strong over the weak; and this law of private property "for the profit of a few ambitious men, subjected thenceforth all the human race to labor, servitude, and misery."

The idea was applied to government in a treatise entitled the _Social Contract_ (1761). The "social-contract" theory was not new, but Rousseau made it famous. He taught that government, law, and social conventions were the outcome of an agreement or contract by which at the misty dawn of history all members of the state had voluntarily bound themselves. All governments exercised their power in last analysis by virtue of this social contract, by will of the people. Laws, therefore, should be submitted to popular vote. The republic is the best form of government, because it is the most sensitive to the desires of the people. This idea of "popular sovereignty," or rule of the people, was in men's minds when they set up a republic in France fourteen years after the death of Rousseau.

Rousseau's cry, "Back to nature," had still another aspect. He said that children should be allowed to follow their natural inclinations, instead of being driven to study. They should learn practical, useful things, instead of Latin and Greek. "Let them learn what they must do when they are men, and not what they must forget."

It is hard to fix limits to the influence of Rousseau's writings. True, both the orthodox Catholics and the philosophical Deists condemned him. But his followers were many, both bourgeois and noble. "Back to nature" became the fad of the day, and court ladies pretended to live a "natural" life and to go fishing. His theory of the social contract, his contention that wealth should not be divided among a few, his idea that the people should rule themselves,--these were to be the inspiration of the republican stage of the French Revolution, and in time to permeate all Europe.

[Sidenote: Beccaria]

The spirit of reform was applied not only against the clergy, the nobles, the monarchy, and faulty systems of law and education, but likewise to the administration of justice. Hitherto the most barbarous "punishments" had been meted out. A pickpocket might be hung for stealing a couple of shillings [Footnote: In England.]; for a more serious offense the criminal might have his bones broken and then be laid on his back on a cart-wheel, to die in agony while crowds looked on and jeered. In a book entitled _Crimes and Punishments_ (1764), an Italian marquis of the name of Beccaria (1738-1794) held that such punishments were not only brutal and barbarous, but did not serve to prevent crimes as effectually as milder sentences, promptly and surely administered. Beccaria's ideas are the basis of our modern laws, although the death penalty still lingers in a few cases.

[Sidenote: Political Economy: the Physiocrats]

In yet another sphere--that of economics--philosophers were examining the old order of things, and asking, as ever, "Is it reasonable?" As we have repeatedly observed, most governments had long followed the mercantilist plan more or less consistently. But in the eighteenth century, François Quesnay, a bourgeois physician at the court of Louis XV, announced to his friends that mercantilism was all wrong. He became the center of a little group of philosophers who called themselves "economists," and who taught that a nation's wealth comes from farming and mining; that manufacturers and traders produce nothing new, but merely exchange or transport commodities. The manufacturers and merchants should therefore be untaxed and unhampered. _Laissez- faire_--"Let them do as they will." Let the farmers pay the taxes. The foremost disciple of _laisser-faire_ in France was Turgot (1727-1781). As minister of finance under Louis XVI he attempted to abolish duties and restrictions on commerce, but his efforts were only partially successful.

[Sidenote: Adam Smith]

Meanwhile, a Scotchman, who had visited France and had known Quesnay, was conveying the new ideas across the Channel. It was Adam Smith, the "father of political economy." Smith was quite in harmony with the philosophic spirit, with its "natural rights," "natural religion," and "natural laws." He was a professor of "moral philosophy" in the University of Glasgow, and as an incident of his philosophical speculations, he thought out a system of political economy, _i.e._, the "laws" by which a nation might increase its wealth, on the lines suggested by Quesnay. Adam Smith's famous book _The Wealth of Nations_ appeared in 1776, the year of American independence. It was a declaration of independence for industry. Let each man, each employer of labor, each seller of merchandise follow his own personal business interests without let or hindrance, for in so doing he is "led by an invisible hand" to promote the good of all. Let the government abolish all monopolies, [Footnote: He was somewhat inconsistent in approving joint-stock monopolies and shipping regulations.] all restrictions on trade, all customs duties, all burdens on industry. Thus only can the true wealth of a nation be promoted.

Smith's opinions were so plausible and his arguments so ingenious that his doctrines steadily gained in influence, and in the first half of the nineteenth century pretty generally triumphed. In actual practice the abolition of restrictions on industry was destined to give free rein to the avarice and cruelty of the most selfish employers, to enrich the bourgeoisie, and to leave the lower classes more miserable than ever. The "Wealth of Nations" was to be the wealth of the bourgeoisie. But meanwhile, it was to destroy mercantilism.

[Sidenote: Conclusion]

We have now completed our survey of the social, religious, and intellectual conditions in the Europe of the eighteenth century. Before our eyes have passed poverty-stricken peasants plowing their fields, prosperous merchants who demand power, frivolous nobles squandering their lives and fortunes, worldly bishops neglecting their duties, humble priests remaining faithful, sober Quakers refusing to fight, earnest astronomers who search the skies, sarcastic Deists who scoff at priests, and bourgeois philosophers who urge reform. The procession is not quite done. Last of all come the kings in their royal ermine and ministers in robes of state. To them we dedicate a new chapter. It will be the last occasion on which kings will merit such detailed attention.

ADDITIONAL READING

GENERAL SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY EUROPE. Brief outlines: J. H. Robinson and C. A. Beard, _The Development of Modern Europe_, Vol. I (1907), ch. viii, ix; H. E. Bourne, _The Revolutionary Period in Europe, 1763-1815_ (1914), ch. i, iii; Clive Day, _History of Commerce_ (1907). More detailed accounts: _Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. VI; and _Histoire générale_, Vol. VII, ch. xiii-xvii. The most scholarly and exhaustive study of social conditions is that of Maxime Kovalevsky, _Die oekonomische Entwicklung Europas bis zum Beginn der kapitalistischen Wirtschaftsform_, trans. into German from Russian by Leo Motzkin, 7 vols. (1901-1914), especially Vols. VI, VII.

FRENCH SOCIETY ON THE EVE OF THE REVOLUTION. Shailer Mathews, _The French Revolution_ (reprint, 1912), ch. i-v, a clear summary; E. J. Lowell, _The Eve of the French Revolution_ (1892), probably the best introduction in English; Alexis de Tocqueville, _The State of Society in France before the Revolution of 1789_, Eng. trans. by Henry Reeve, 3d ed. (1888), a brilliant and justly famous work; H. A. Taine, _The Ancient Régime_, Eng. trans. by John Durand, new rev. ed. (1896), another very celebrated work, better on the literary and philosophical aspects of the Old Régime than on the economic; Albert Sorel, _L'Europe et la Révolution française, Vol. I (1885) of this monumental history is an able presentation of French social conditions in the eighteenth century; Arthur Young, _Travels in France, 1787, 1788, and 1789_, valuable observations of a contemporary English gentleman-farmer on conditions in France, published in several editions, notably in the Bohn Library. Detailed treatises in French: _Histoire de France_, Vol. IX, Part I (1910), _Règne de Louis XVI, 1774-1789_, by H. Carré, P. Sagnac, and E. Lavisse, especially livres III, IV; Emile Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en France avant 1789_, Vol. II (1901), livre VII; Maxime Kovalevsky, _La France économique et sociale à la veille de la Révolution_, 2 vols. (1909- 1911), an admirable study of common life both rural and urban; Georges d'Avenel, _Histoire économique de la propriété, des salaires, etc., 1200-1800_, 6 vols. (1894-1912), elaborate treatments of such topics as money, land, salaries, the wealthy and bourgeois classes, the growth of private expenses, etc.; Albert Babeau's careful monographs on many phases of the Old Régime, such as _Les voyageurs en France_ (1885), _La ville_ (1884), _La vie rurale_ (1885), _Les artisans et les domestiques_ (1886), _Les bourgeois_ (1886), _La vie militaire_, 2 vols. (1890), _Le village_ (1891), _La province_, 2 vols. (1894); Nicolas Karéiev, _Les paysans et la question paysanne en France dans le dernier quart du XVIIIe siècle_, Fr. trans. (1899); Edmé Champion, _La France d'après les cahiers de 1789_ (1897). Also see books listed under THE FRENCH MONARCHY, 1743-1789, p. 463, below.

ENGLISH SOCIETY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. Brief surveys: A. L. Cross, _History of England and Greater Britain_ (1914), ch. xliv; G. T. Warner, _Landmarks in English Industrial History_, 11th ed. (1912), ch. xiv; H. de B. Gibbins, _Industry in England_, 6th ed. (1910), ch. xvii- xx; G. H. Perris, _The Industrial History of Modern England_ (1914), ch. i. Fuller treatments: H. D. Traill and J. S. Mann (editors), _Social England_, illus. ed., 6 vols. in 12 (1909), ch. xvi-xviii; W. G. Sydney, _England and the English in the Eighteenth Century_, 2 vols. (1891); E. S. Roscoe, _The English Scene in the Eighteenth Century_ (1912); Sir H. T. Wood, _Industrial England in the Middle of the Eighteenth Century_ (1910); Sidney and Beatrice Webb, _English Local Government from the Revolution to the Municipal Corporations Act, 1688- 1835, The Manor and the Borough_, 2 parts (1908), and _The Story of the King's Highway_ (1913); W. E. H. Lecky, _A History of England in the Eighteenth Century_, London ed., 7 vols. (1907), particularly full on social and intellectual conditions. Special studies and monographs: A. Andréadès, _History of the Bank of England_, Eng. trans. by Christabel Meredith (1909), an authoritative review by a Greek scholar; Sir Walter Besant, _London in the Eighteenth Century_ (1903), charmingly written but not always trustworthy; J. L. and B. Hammond, _The Village Labourer, 1760-1832_ (1911); J. E. Thorold Rogers, _History of Agriculture and Prices in England_, 7 vols. (1866-1902), a monumental work, of which Vol. VII deals with the eighteenth century; R. E. Prothero, _English Farming Past and Present_ (1912); E. C. K. Gonner, _Common Land and Inclosure_ (1912); A. H. Johnson, _The Disappearance of the Small Landowner_ (1909); Wilhelm Hasbach, _A History of the English Agricultural Labourer_, new ed. trans. into English by Ruth Kenyon (1908); R. M. Gamier, _History of the English Landed Interest, its Customs, Laws and Agriculture_, 2 vols. (1892-1893), and, by the same author, _Annals of the British Peasantry_ (1895). For interesting contemporary accounts of English agriculture in the eighteenth century, see the journals of Arthur Young, _A Six Weeks' Tour through the Southern Counties_ (1768), _A Six Months' Tour through the North of England_, 4 vols. (1791), and _The Farmer's Tour through the East of England_, 4 vols. (1791). Also see books listed under THE BRITISH MONARCHY, 1760-1800, pp. 461 f., below.

SPECIAL STUDIES OF SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN OTHER COUNTRIES. For Scotland: H. G. Graham, _Social Life in Scotland in the Eighteenth Century_, 2 vols. (1900). For Hungary: Henry Marczali, _Hungary in the Eighteenth Century_ (1910). For Russia: James Mavor, _An Economic History of Russia_, Vol. I (1914), Book II, ch. i-iv. For Spain: Georges Desdevises du Dezert, _L'Espagne de l'ancien régime_, 3 vols. (1897-1904). For the Germanies: Karl Biedermann, _Deutschland im achtsehnten Jahrhundert_, 2 vols. in 3 (1867-1880).

ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. The general histories of Christianity, cited in the bibliography to Chapter IV, above, should be consulted. Additional information can be gathered from the following. On the Catholic Church: William Barry, _The Papacy and Modern Times_ (1911), ch. v; _Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. V (1908), ch. iv, on Gallicanism and Jansenism, by Viscount St. Cyres, a vigorous opponent of Ultramontanism; _Histoire générale_, Vol. VI, ch. vi, and Vol. VII, ch. xvii, both by Émile Chénon; Joseph de Maistre, _Du pape_, 24th ed. (1876), and _De l'église gallicane_, most celebrated treatments of Gallicanism from the standpoint of an Ultramontane and orthodox Roman Catholic; C. A. Sainte-Beuve, _Port-Royal_, 2d ed., 5 vols. (1860), the best literary account of Jansenism; R. B. C. Graham, _A Vanished Arcadia: being some account of the Jesuits in Paraguay, 1607 to 1767_ (1901); Paul de Crousaz-Crétet, _L'église et l'état, ou les deux puissances au XVIIIe siècle, 1713-1789_ (1893), on the relations of church and state; Léon Mention, _Documents relatifs aux rapports du clergé avec la royauté de 1682 à 1789_, 2 vols. (1893- 1903), containing many important documents. On Protestantism in England: H. O. Wakeman, _An Introduction to the History of the Church of England_, 5th ed. (1898), ch. xviii, xix; J. H. Overton and Frederic Relton, _A History of the Church of England, 1714-1800_ (1906), being Vol. VII of a comprehensive work ed. by W. R. W. Stephens and William Hunt; John Stoughton, _Religion under Queen Anne and the Georges, 1702- 1800_, 2 vols. (1878); H. W. Clark, _History of English Nonconformity_, 2 vols. (1911-1913), especially Vol. II, Book IV, ch. i, ii, on Methodism; W. C. Braithwaite, _The Beginnings of Quakerism_ (1912); F. J. Snell, _Wesley and Methodism_ (1900); and T. E. Thorpe, _Joseph Priestley_ (1906).

DEISM AND THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. _Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. V, ch. xxiii, and Vol. VIII, ch. i; _Histoire générale_, Vol. VI, ch. x, and Vol. VII, ch. xv, two excellent chapters on natural science, 1648-1788, by Paul Tannery; Sir Oliver Lodge, _Pioneers of Science_ (1893); Sir Leslie Stephen, _History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century_, 3d ed., 2 vols. (1902), an interesting account of the English Deists and of the new political and economic theorists, and, by the same author, _English Literature and Society in the Eighteenth Century_ (1909); Edmund Gosse, _A History of Eighteenth Century Literature, 1660-1780_ (1911); J. M. Robertson, _A Short History of Free Thought_, 3d rev. ed., 2 vols. (1915), a sympathetic treatment of deism and rationalism; C. S. Devas, _The Key to the World's Progress_ (1906), suggestive criticism of the thought of the eighteenth century from the standpoint of a well- informed Roman Catholic. On the most celebrated French philosophers of the time, see the entertaining and enthusiastic biographies by John (Viscount) Morley, _Rousseau_, 2 vols. (1873), _Diderot and the Encyclopædists_, 2 vols. (1891), _Voltaire_ (1903), and the essays on Turgot, etc., scattered throughout his _Critical Miscellanies_, 4 vols. (1892-1908). There is a convenient little biography of _Montesquieu_ by Albert Sorel, Eng. trans. by Gustave Masson (1887), and useful monographs by J. C. Collins, _Bolingbroke, a Historical Study; and Voltaire in England_ (1886). Such epochal works as Montesquieu's _Spirit of the Laws_, Voltaire's _Letters on the English_ and _Philosophical Dictionary_, and Rousseau's _Social Contract_ and _Émile_, are readily procurable in English. On the rise of political economy: Henry Higgs, _The Physiocrats_ (1897); Charles Gide and Charles Rist, _A History of Economic Doctrines from the Time of the Physiocrats_, Eng. trans. (1915), Book I, ch. i, ii; L. L. Price, _A Short History of Political Economy in England from Adam Smith to Arnold Toynbee_, 7th ed. (1911); R. B. (Viscount) Haldane, _Life of Adam Smith_ (1887) in the "Great Writers" Series; John Rae, _Life of Adam Smith_ (1895), containing copious extracts from Smith's letters and papers; Georges Weulersse, _Le mouvement physiocratique en France de 1756 à 1770_, 2 vols. (1910), scholarly and elaborate. There is a two- volume edition of Adam Smith's _Wealth of Nations_ (1910) in "Everyman's Library," with an admirable introductory essay by E. R. A. Seligman.