-=-[end of page #12]rate as they did formerly; accordingly, wealth and power are very unequally distributed amongst nations at this moment; and, in Europe, there is not one nation that is not either rising or on its decline. (see Appendix A.) =sic - there is none=The purpose of the present Inquiry is, by tracing those causes that still continue to operate, to discover how nations that now stand high may be prevented from sinking below their level: a thing to which history shews they have a natural tendency, and which history shews also is attended with very distressing consequences.We do not labour in Utopia on schemes, but in Britain on real business; and the inquiry is, how a nation, situated as this is, and having more than its share of power, importance, and wealth, may prolong their possession?In this Inquiry we shall begin with taking a lesson from history, which will serve as some guide.As to the rise of other nations, we neither can nor should attempt to impede that; let them rise to our level, but let us not sink down to theirs. [end of page #13]CHAP. II.Of the General Causes that operate, both externally and internally, in bringing down Nations that have risen above their Level to that assigned to them by their Extent, Fertility, and Population; and of the Manner in which Wealth destroyed Power in ancient Nations.WITHOUT considering the particular causes that have raised some nations greatly above others, there are some general causes of decline which operate in all cases; but even the general causes are not always similar, they vary their way of producing the effect, according to circumstances.If a nation excels in arts and manufactures, others acquire a taste for what they make, and imitate them. If they excel in the art of war, they teach their enemies to fight as well as themselves. If their territories are large, the unprotected and far distant parts provoke attack and plunder. They become more difficult and expensive to govern. If they owe their superiority to climate and soil, they generally preserve it but a short time. Necessity acts so much more powerfully on those who do not enjoy the same advantages, that they soon come to an equality. --In whatever the superiority exists, emulation and envy prompt to rivalship in peace, and to frequent trials of strength in war. The contempt and pride which accompany wealth and power, and the envy and jealousy they excite amongst other nations, are continual causes of change, and form the great basis of the revolutions amongst the human race.The wants of men increase with their knowledge of what it is good to enjoy; and it is the desire to gratify those wants that increases necessity, and this necessity is the spur to action.There are a few natural wants that require no knowledge in order to be felt; such as hunger and thirst, and the other appetites which men have in common with all animals, and which are linked, as it [end of page #14] were, to their existence. {16} But while nations satisfy themselves with supplying such wants, there is neither wealth nor power amongst them. Of consequence, it is not into the conduct of such that we are to inquire.Excepting, however, those wants which are inseparable from our existence, all the others are, more or less, fictitious, and increase with our knowledge and habits; it is, therefore, evident that the nation that is the highest above others feels the fewest wants; or, in other words, feels no wants. She knows nothing that she does not possess, and therefore may be said to want nothing; or which is the same thing, not knowing what she does want, she makes no effort to obtain it.Thus necessity of rising higher, does not operate, on a nation that sees none higher than itself; at least, it does only operate in a very slender degree. {17} Whereas, in the nation that is behind hand with other nations around, every one is led by emulation and envy, and by a feeling of their own wants, to imitate and equal those that are farther advanced.---{16} A child cries for food without knowing what it is; and all the other natural appetites, though they may be increased by habit, by knowledge, and fancy, are independent of the mind in its first state.{17} The necessity, no doubt, continues to preserve what they have; and, therefore, tends to keep them in a permanent state. Some individuals again, in less affluence than others, endeavour to equal them; by which means some progress is still making in the nation that possesses the greatest share of wealth and power; but it is only partial and feeble. Those who live in the nation that is the most advanced are contented and have all they wish; they possess every thing of which they know, they can have no particular desire for any thing they have not got, that will produce great energy and exertion. A man may wish for wings, or for perpetual youth; but, as he can scarcely expect to obtain either, he will make little exertion. With things really attainable, but not known, the case is less productive of energy still. The people of Asia found silk a natural produce of their country; till the Europeans saw it, they never attempted to produce so rich a material; but no pains has since been spared to try to produce it, in almost every country, where there was the least chance of success. We imitated the silk mills of Italy, and the Italians (as well as many other nations) are now imitating our cotton mills. In the case of a nation that follows others, it always knows what it wants, and may judge whether it can obtain it; but the nation the most advanced, gropes in the dark.-=-[end of page #15]Thus it is, that necessity acts but in a very inferior degree on the nation that is the farthest advanced; while it operates in a very powerful way on those that are in arrear; and this single reason, without the intervention of wars or any sort of contest or robbery, would, in the process of time, bring nations to a sort of equality in wealth and refinement; that is, it would bring them all into possession of the means of gratifying their wants.War, excited by the violent and vile passions,-- by the overbearing pride and insolence of one, and the envy and villainy of another, derange this natural and smooth operation, which, nevertheless, continues to act in silence at all times, and in every circumstance, and which, indeed, is in general the chief cause of those very disorders by which its operations are sometimes facilitated; sometimes apparently interrupted; sometimes, their effect for a moment reversed; but their action never, for one instant, totally suspended.The desire of enjoyment makes all mankind act as if they were running a race. They always keep the goal in view, though they attempt to be the foremost to arrive at it by various means. But the greatest exertions are never made by those who have got the advance of their competitors. Amongst the wants of mankind, ease is one of very permanent operation; and whenever the necessity of supplying other wants ceases, the desire of supplying that, leads to a state of inaction and rest. {18} To seek ease, however, does not imply necessarily to seek total inaction or rest; a diminished exertion is comparative ease; and this is always observable in a state of prosperity, either of an individual or of a nation, after the prosperity has been long enough---{18} The truth of this may be disputed by those who look at mankind in an artificial state; because a variety of their actions seem without any particular motive. But not the smallest exertion is ever made without it. The man who walks out and takes exercise, wants health or amusement as much as the working man does bread. Even those who toil in the rounds of pleasure, are always in pursuit of something. Their not finding the object is another part of the consideration; but they always have one in view. As to savages, and the poorer classes of people, they shew their propensity by a more simple process; that is, merely by resting inactive, when they are not compelled to labour.-=-[end of page #16]enjoyed to create a certain degree of lassitude and indifference, which it does on every nation. {19}Whatever may be the accidental circumstance which first raises one nation above others, or the train of adventitious ones that increase for a while and continue that superiority, nothing can be more clear and certain, than, that they have a natural tendency to come back to a level, merely by the exertions of men in the direction of acquiring wealth by industry, and without any of those causes which arise out of war, or interrupting the career of each other.When, from the conduct of one nation towards another, or from whatever other cause war, =sic= becomes the means by which the superiority of two nations is to be decided, there are many things in favour of the least wealthy nation.It has less to protect and to lose, and more to attack and to gain; the task is much easier and more alluring. There is a sort of energy in attempting to obtain, that is not to be found in those who are only exerting themselves to keep, of which it is difficult to explain the cause, but of which the existence is very certain.Where natural strength, and the struggle with want is great, as is the case with nations who have made but little progress in acquiring wealth, the contest with a people more enervated by ease, and less inured to toil is very unequal, and does more than compensate those artificial aids which are derived from the possession of property. {20} From this cause, the triumph of poorer over more wealthy nations has generally arisen, and, in most cases, has occasioned the contest to end in favour of the more hardy and poorer people.Of the revolutions that took place in the ancient world; whether operated by degrees or by violence and suddenly, those may be ge----{19} Doctor Garth, in his admirable poem of the Dispensary, says;--"Even health for want of change becomes disease."This is the case with nations sunk in prosperity.{20} Why men should have been less tenacious to keep that which is fairly theirs, than rapaciously to obtain that which is not, is a strange thing; but nothing is more certain; and the effects of that propensity are very great, and its existence very general. In the ruin of nations, it is a most active and powerful cause.-=-[end of page #17]nerally traced as the causes. In those ancient nations any considerable degree of luxury and military success were incompatible with each other; but, in the present age, the case is greatly altered. Military discipline is not near so severe as formerly, and bodily strength has but little effect, while the engines of war can only be procured by those resources which wealth affords; by this means, the decline of nations is, at least, now become a less natural and slower progress than formerly; the operations of war have now a quite different tendency from what they formerly had, and this effect is produced by the introduction of cannon, and a different mode of attack and defence; to carry on which, a very considerable degree of wealth is necessary. {21}In former times, the character and situation of the people, the object they had in view, their bravery and the skill of their leaders, did every thing; but now the skill of leaders and the command of money are the chief objects; for there is not sufficient difference between any two nations in Europe as to counterbalance those: and, indeed, (except so far as military skill is accidental,) it is to be found principally in nations who have a sufficient degree of wealth to exercise it and call it into action.We shall see that the first revolutions in the world were effected by the natural strength, energy, and bravery of poor nations triumphing over those that were less hardy, in consequence of the enjoyment of wealth, until the time of the Romans; who, like other nations, first triumphed by means of superior energy and bravery; and, afterwards by making war a trade, continued, by having regular standing armies, to conquer the nations who had only temporary levies, or militias, to fight in their defence.The triumph of poor nations, over others in many respects their superiors, continued during the middle ages, but the wealth acquired by certain nations then was not wrested from them by war, but by an accidental and unforeseen change in the channel through which it---{21} An idea has gone abroad, since the successes of the French armies, that money is not necessary to war, even in the present times. It will be shewn, in its proper place, that the French armies were maintained at very great expense, and that a poor country could not have done what France did.-=-flowed. At the same time that this change took place, without the intervention of force, the art of war changed in favour of wealthy nations, but the changes took place by slow degrees, and the power of nations now may almost be estimated by their disposable incomes.This change, however, has by no means secured the prosperity of wealthy nations; it has only prevented poor ones, unable by means of fair competition to do by conquest what they could not effect by perseverance in arts and industry; for, in other respects, though it makes the prosperity of a nation more dependant =sic= on wealth, and more independent of violence; it prevents any nation from preserving its political importance after it loses its riches. It does not by any means interrupt that progress by which poor nations gradually rise up and rival richer ones in arts. It has not done away the advantages that arise from superior industry and attention to business, or from the gradual introduction of knowledge amongst the more ignorant, thereby lessening their inferiority, and tending to bring nations to a level; on the contrary, by increasing the advantages, and securing the gradual triumphs gained by arts and industry, from the violence of war, it makes wealth a more desirable object, and the loss of it a greater misfortune. It tends to augment the natural propensity that there is in poor nations to equal richer ones {22}, although it, at the same time, augments the difficulty of accomplishing their intentions.The superior energy of poverty and necessity which leads men, under this pressure, to act incessantly in whatever way they have it in their power to act, and that seems likely to bring them on a level with those that are richer, is then the ground-work of the rise and fall of nations, as well as of individuals. This tendency is sometimes favoured by particular circumstances, and sometimes it is counteracted by them; but its operation is incessant, and it has never yet failed in producing its effect, for the triumph of poverty over wealth on the great scale as on the small, though very irregular in its pace, has continued without interruption from the earliest records to the present moment.---{22} The present inferiority of Poland, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, and Portugal, compared with the rank they held in former times, is easily accounted for by looking at the scale of their revenues.-=-[end of page #19]CHAP. III.Of the Nations that rose to Wealth and Power previously to the Conquests in Asia and Africa, and the Causes which ruined them.PREVIOUS to the conquests made by Alexander the Great, the history of ancient nations is confused, incomplete, and inaccurate.During the contests of his successors, the intricacy and confusion are still continued, but materials are more plentiful, more accurate, and more authentic.During the first period, excepting what is contained in sacred history, a few detached facts, collected by writers long after, are our only guides in judging of the situation of ancient states, some of which consisted of great empires, and others of single cities possessed of a very small territory.Add to this, that great and striking events occupied almost exclusively the attention of historians. The means by which those events were produced were considered as of lesser importance.So far, however, as the present inquiry can be elucidated, although materials are few, yet, by adhering to a distinct plan, and keeping the object always before us, we may arrive at a conclusion.The countries that appear to have been first inhabited were Syria and Egypt, {23} both of them situated on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea; and as early as any authentic records extend, those were great and powerful countries in which agriculture and population had made great progress, and into which commerce had already brought many of the luxuries of the East.The Phoenicians, a people differing in name from those who were subjected to the Assyrian monarchs, occupied that part of Syria, now called the Levant, directly on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea; they were the first who rose to wealth and power by arts and com----{23} Reasons have been given in the preface for not taking any view of the situation of India, though, by its produce, it appears, at least of equal antiquity.-=-[end of page #20]merce. Tyre and Sidon were the abodes of commerce long before the arrival of the Jews in the land of Canaan, situated in the adjacent country, with whom, in the days of David and Solomon, the Phoenicians were on terms of friendship and alliance, {24} assisting the latter to carry on commerce, and enrich his people. (See Appendix B.) =sic - there is none=The whole coast of the Mediterranean lay open to them for navigation, as did also the Grecian islands, and as their own soil was barren, they purchased the necessaries of life, giving in exchange the rich stuffs they had manufactured, and the produce of the East of which they almost exclusively possessed the commerce.The Egyptians were possessed of the most fertile soil in the world, bounded by the Mediterranean Sea on the north, and on the east and west by barren deserts. Their country was of a triangular form, and watered by the Nile, which, passing through it in its greatest extent, runs nearly down the middle.Thus situated, in the country depending on the Nile for its fertility, and on all sides protected from enemies, it was exceedingly natural to cultivate the arts of peace, and it was not possible that it should be divided into many different nations, as in other countries in early times was the case, when sovereignty rose from parental authority, and when there was no natural bond between the heads of different families.The great abundance with which the inhabitants were supplied, in years when the Nile overflowed in a favourable manner, and the uncertainty of future plenty were inducements for accumulation and foresight, which are not equally necessary in countries where the important circumstances of plenty or want do not depend on one single event over the whole face of a country, separated, besides, from others by a sea, which they could not navigate, and by deserts not very easy to pass over.The difficulties of transporting corn, which were sufficient to deter the Egyptians from depending on a supply from other parts, did not, however, prevent other nations from applying to them in times of scarcity, and accordingly it was the granary of the ancient world.---{24} For farther particulars of this commerce see the Digression on the Trade to India.-=-[end of page #21]To those natural advantages, the Egyptians added some others, different in their nature, but not less precious.They enjoyed a mild government, and an admirable and simple code of laws. Their docility and obedience have never been equalled, and as one maxim, was, to admit of no person being idle, it is evident that the population must have increased rapidly, and that there must have been an impossibility to employ the whole labour of so many hands on the means of providing subsistence in a country, where the manners were simple, the soil fertile, and the wants few.The surplus of the industry of Egypt appears to have been at the disposal of the sovereigns to whom all the lands belonged, and for which they exacted a rent in kind, as is the custom among the native powers on both peninsulas of India to this day. By that means, they were enabled to produce those stupendous works which have been the admiration and wonder of all succeeding generations, and of every nation. The city of Thebes, with the labyrinth; Memphis, the canals, and the pyramids would all be incredible, had not their singular structure preserved those latter efforts of industry from the ravages of time, and left them nearly entire to the present day.The Phoenicians were a colony from that great country; for the Egyptians in general had a dislike to the sea. It is well known, however, that people who live immediately on the coast have a propensity to navigation, and it is probable that those Egyptians who left their own fruitful land to settle on the barren borders of Syria, were from the delta of Lower Egypt, which lies on the sea coast, and is intersected by a number of branches of the river Nile. {25}It is not surprising that such a colony, following the natural propensity to naval affairs, and carrying with it the arts of dying and weaving, together with whatever else the Egyptians knew, should become under the influence of necessity, and in a favourable situation for arts and commerce, as much celebrated for commercial riches, as their mother country had long been for agriculture and the cultivation of the sciences.---{25} That the Phoenicians were from Egypt is not doubted, and their becoming a totally different people from being on a different soil and in a different situation, is a strong proof of the influence of physical circumstances on the characters of nations.-=-[end of page #22]Tyre accordingly is the first example of a city becoming rich and powerful by arts and commerce, and though few details are known, yet those are of a very decided character.The pride of the Tyrians appears to have been the cause of their fall, and that pride was occasioned by the possession of wealth, far beyond that of any other people then in the world. While they were great they aimed at monopoly, and were partly the cause of the rapid decay of Jerusalem. After the death of Solomon, they founded a colony, well situated for the extention of their own trade, which consisted chiefly in bringing the rich produce of Arabia, and India, into the western world. Carthage was placed on the south coast of the Mediterranean to the west of Egypt, so as never to have any direct intercourse with India itself, while it lay extremely well for distributing the merchandize, brought by the Tyrians, from thence in the interior of Africa, Spain, Sicily, Italy, and the parts that lay distant from the mother city. {26}From the extent of its territory and situation, Tyre could only be wealthy; it never could be powerful, as the great Assyrian monarchy, which lay immediately to the eastward, prevented the possibility of its extention; and, as to power at sea, there was =sic= at that time no contests on that element; the most then that could be expected was, that it should have sufficient strength to protect itself, which, being on a small island, very near the shore, was not difficult. If Alexander the Great had not joined it to the land by an earthen mound, or mole, Tyre could never have been taken till some other power got the superiority by sea; which could not have been till after the Romans had conquered Carthage.Babylon, which was the centre of the Assyrian empire, and commu----{26} The best account of the commodities in which the commerce of the Tyrians consisted, as well as the best description of their wealth, and the cause of the downfall is to be found in Ezekiel, chap. xxvi. and the two following. It is perfectly distinct and conclusive with respect to the principal points of wealth, pride, and luxury founded on wealth.The Tyre here spoken of is not the same taken by the king of Babylon, or Assyrian monarch long before Alexander's time, which only appears to have been a settlement on the main land belonging to the same people, and subject to the same prince.-=-[end of page #23]nicated with the eastern part of Asia, by the river Euphrates, and by the Persian Gulf with India, was, as Memphis, of Egypt, a capital; but the Assyrians were not protected on all sides, like the Egyptians, from foreign inroads; they consequently did not cultivate the arts of peace and the sciences so much. On the east, were the Medes and Persians; on the north, the Scythians and Partheans; but, as the territory was fertile and extensive, under one of the finest climates of the world, the monarchs became rich and luxurious, which was the cause of their subjection, and they were always subdued by people less advanced in luxury than themselves.The whole of these countries, Egypt, Syria, Phoenicia, and Greece, fell under the arms of Alexander. This was the first great and general revolution in that part of the world, from which Carthage alone, of all the ancient seats of wealth and greatness, escaped.The triumph of Alexander was, no doubt, that of a great captain; but, except the destruction of Tyre, and the foundation of Alexandria, which changed the principal seat of commerce, there was nothing durable in his conquests. The reigning families were destroyed, and the dynasties altered; but, under his immediate successors, the Egyptians, the inhabitants of Syria, and the Greeks, had different masters.It was after the foundation of Alexandria, and under the successors of Alexander, that Egypt became really a commercial country. Its wealth had hitherto arisen rather from the great population and fertility of the country, than from any participation in the trade to the East; but after Alexandria was founded, the seat of empire, which had always been in Upper Egypt, was established in Lower Egypt, canals were dug, and every means taken to make the passage from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean as commodious as possible.Carthage began then to decline. Tyre was no more: and Alexandria was situated on the same side of the Mediterranean Sea, in a much more advantageous position for receiving the productions of the East, and equally advantageous for distributing them.The Phoenicians never recovered their importance; and indeed it was not the interest of the Persian monarch to encourage trade by [end of page #24] the old channel of the Red Sea and Rhinocolura, but rather to come directly through the Persian Gulf, ascend the Euphrates, and cross the country to the borders of the Mediterranean, which was a way not much more expensive than by the old rout =sic=. As the greater part of the produce imported was to be consumed at the luxurious court of Persia, and in the numerous rich cities with which that empire was filled, there is no doubt that the way by the Persian Gulf was by much the least expensive; for even Solomon, King of Jerusalem, long before, though he lived at one extremity of the journey, and had ships for trading by the other channel, had carried on trade by this way; and, in order to facilitate it, had laid the foundation of the magnificent city of Palmyra, nearly in the middle between the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf of Persia.Whilst those revolutions were effecting amongst the ancient nations on the continents of Asia and Africa, the Greeks, who had been the most barbarous of all, became, by degrees, the most refined; their learning and arts were all founded, originally, on the Egyptian learning; and though at last they carried them to a higher pitch than their masters; yet Egypt, for many centuries, was looked up to, even by the Greeks, as they were afterwards for a number of centuries by the Romans, and the other nations of the world.The education of the Greeks; very different in some of the states from what it was in others, had, however, the same tendency in all; that tendency was to invigorate the body, and instruct and strengthen the mind. While this continued, we see them at first resist the Persians, though in very unequal numbers; and, at last, the Grecian vigour, discipline, and skill, subdue the whole of the then civilized world.After the conquests of Alexander, the wealth and luxury of Asia were introduced into Greece, and indeed the Greeks refined on that luxury. At Athens and the other cities which might be said to give manners to the rest, shews, and theatrical representations were after that more attended to than the military art; and cabal, intrigue, and corruption, were introduced in the place of that manly, pure, and admirable love of their country, for which, in less wealthy, but in better [end of page #25] times, they had been so highly distinguished above every other people.This was the situation of things when a nation, less advanced in arts, and uncorrupted with the possession of wealth, but which was still considered by the Greeks as barbarous, prepared at once to subdue the whole of them, and give a still more striking proof of the triumph which vigour and energy obtain over those who have only wealth; the possession of which, undoubtedly, gives a certain means of defence, though one very unequal to resisting a nation when excited by the desire of sharing its possessions, and yet vigorous and strong, not being unnerved by the enjoyment of ease and luxury. [end of page #26]CHAP. IV.Of the Romans. -- the Causes of their Rise under the Republic, and of their Decline under the Emperors. -- the great Error generally fallen into with respect to the Comparison between Rome and Carthage; Proofs that it is wrong, and not at all applicable to France and England.IN the rise and greatness of Rome, there was nothing accidental, all was the effect of the most unremitting perseverance in a plan, at first, of petty robbery; which, as it extended, was honoured with the title of conquest; and, as it succeeded, has been considered as deserving the appellation of great.It is true, that there were talents exercised, and methods practised, which deserve the highest praise, and are worthy of imitation. It is impossible to withhold admiration at the recital, but the end in view, from the beginning, cannot be justified.Although neither the end in view, nor, generally speaking, the means employed, are deserving of imitation, yet we shall find more advantage from examining them than from the history of any other nation.In the first place, so far as prosperity depends on good conduct, and good conduct depends on the state of the mind, the Romans are a most striking example. While they preserved the manners that first occasioned their rise, they continued to become more powerful; as they forsook these manners, their power abandoned them; and they, after having conquered all with whom they ever contended, because they had more skill or less corruption, were themselves overcome, by men infinitely inferior to what they had been, before they became enervated and corrupt.The smallness of the territory, which the Romans at first possessed, laid them under the necessity of extending it, and drawing resources from their neighbours; who, being brave and hardy, could not be easily either robbed or subdued. [end of page #27]The Romans began with robbing, and finished with subduing them all, but the modes they practised deserve attention.It is in vain to think that superior bravery or skill would alone have done the business; those are often triumphant, but occasionally defeated. The Romans owed their gradual aggrandizement to a line of conduct that, whether in good or ill fortune, tended to make them the sovereigns of the world. A line of conduct in which, if it had been in human nature to persevere, they would have preserved the situation to which they had elevated themselves.Along with this decided conduct, which seems to have arisen from something innate in themselves, or to have been occasioned by some circumstance that is not known, the Romans possessed a number of methods, in addition to personal bravery, by which they advanced the end they had in view.When the kings were abolished, Rome was only a small, rude, irregular place, and a receptacle for plunder; inhabited, however, by men who had great strength of mind, and who possessed a great command over themselves.Their moral code was suitable to their situation. To rob, plunder, and destroy an enemy was a merit; to betray a trust, or to defraud a fellow citizen, was a crime of the greatest magnitude. With the Romans, oaths were inviolable; and attachment to the public was the greatest virtue.
-=-
[end of page #12]
rate as they did formerly; accordingly, wealth and power are very unequally distributed amongst nations at this moment; and, in Europe, there is not one nation that is not either rising or on its decline. (see Appendix A.) =sic - there is none=
The purpose of the present Inquiry is, by tracing those causes that still continue to operate, to discover how nations that now stand high may be prevented from sinking below their level: a thing to which history shews they have a natural tendency, and which history shews also is attended with very distressing consequences.
We do not labour in Utopia on schemes, but in Britain on real business; and the inquiry is, how a nation, situated as this is, and having more than its share of power, importance, and wealth, may prolong their possession?
In this Inquiry we shall begin with taking a lesson from history, which will serve as some guide.
As to the rise of other nations, we neither can nor should attempt to impede that; let them rise to our level, but let us not sink down to theirs. [end of page #13]
CHAP. II.
Of the General Causes that operate, both externally and internally, in bringing down Nations that have risen above their Level to that assigned to them by their Extent, Fertility, and Population; and of the Manner in which Wealth destroyed Power in ancient Nations.
WITHOUT considering the particular causes that have raised some nations greatly above others, there are some general causes of decline which operate in all cases; but even the general causes are not always similar, they vary their way of producing the effect, according to circumstances.
If a nation excels in arts and manufactures, others acquire a taste for what they make, and imitate them. If they excel in the art of war, they teach their enemies to fight as well as themselves. If their territories are large, the unprotected and far distant parts provoke attack and plunder. They become more difficult and expensive to govern. If they owe their superiority to climate and soil, they generally preserve it but a short time. Necessity acts so much more powerfully on those who do not enjoy the same advantages, that they soon come to an equality. --In whatever the superiority exists, emulation and envy prompt to rivalship in peace, and to frequent trials of strength in war. The contempt and pride which accompany wealth and power, and the envy and jealousy they excite amongst other nations, are continual causes of change, and form the great basis of the revolutions amongst the human race.
The wants of men increase with their knowledge of what it is good to enjoy; and it is the desire to gratify those wants that increases necessity, and this necessity is the spur to action.
There are a few natural wants that require no knowledge in order to be felt; such as hunger and thirst, and the other appetites which men have in common with all animals, and which are linked, as it [end of page #14] were, to their existence. {16} But while nations satisfy themselves with supplying such wants, there is neither wealth nor power amongst them. Of consequence, it is not into the conduct of such that we are to inquire.
Excepting, however, those wants which are inseparable from our existence, all the others are, more or less, fictitious, and increase with our knowledge and habits; it is, therefore, evident that the nation that is the highest above others feels the fewest wants; or, in other words, feels no wants. She knows nothing that she does not possess, and therefore may be said to want nothing; or which is the same thing, not knowing what she does want, she makes no effort to obtain it.
Thus necessity of rising higher, does not operate, on a nation that sees none higher than itself; at least, it does only operate in a very slender degree. {17} Whereas, in the nation that is behind hand with other nations around, every one is led by emulation and envy, and by a feeling of their own wants, to imitate and equal those that are farther advanced.
---
{16} A child cries for food without knowing what it is; and all the other natural appetites, though they may be increased by habit, by knowledge, and fancy, are independent of the mind in its first state.
{17} The necessity, no doubt, continues to preserve what they have; and, therefore, tends to keep them in a permanent state. Some individuals again, in less affluence than others, endeavour to equal them; by which means some progress is still making in the nation that possesses the greatest share of wealth and power; but it is only partial and feeble. Those who live in the nation that is the most advanced are contented and have all they wish; they possess every thing of which they know, they can have no particular desire for any thing they have not got, that will produce great energy and exertion. A man may wish for wings, or for perpetual youth; but, as he can scarcely expect to obtain either, he will make little exertion. With things really attainable, but not known, the case is less productive of energy still. The people of Asia found silk a natural produce of their country; till the Europeans saw it, they never attempted to produce so rich a material; but no pains has since been spared to try to produce it, in almost every country, where there was the least chance of success. We imitated the silk mills of Italy, and the Italians (as well as many other nations) are now imitating our cotton mills. In the case of a nation that follows others, it always knows what it wants, and may judge whether it can obtain it; but the nation the most advanced, gropes in the dark.
-=-
[end of page #15]
Thus it is, that necessity acts but in a very inferior degree on the nation that is the farthest advanced; while it operates in a very powerful way on those that are in arrear; and this single reason, without the intervention of wars or any sort of contest or robbery, would, in the process of time, bring nations to a sort of equality in wealth and refinement; that is, it would bring them all into possession of the means of gratifying their wants.
War, excited by the violent and vile passions,-- by the overbearing pride and insolence of one, and the envy and villainy of another, derange this natural and smooth operation, which, nevertheless, continues to act in silence at all times, and in every circumstance, and which, indeed, is in general the chief cause of those very disorders by which its operations are sometimes facilitated; sometimes apparently interrupted; sometimes, their effect for a moment reversed; but their action never, for one instant, totally suspended.
The desire of enjoyment makes all mankind act as if they were running a race. They always keep the goal in view, though they attempt to be the foremost to arrive at it by various means. But the greatest exertions are never made by those who have got the advance of their competitors. Amongst the wants of mankind, ease is one of very permanent operation; and whenever the necessity of supplying other wants ceases, the desire of supplying that, leads to a state of inaction and rest. {18} To seek ease, however, does not imply necessarily to seek total inaction or rest; a diminished exertion is comparative ease; and this is always observable in a state of prosperity, either of an individual or of a nation, after the prosperity has been long enough
---
{18} The truth of this may be disputed by those who look at mankind in an artificial state; because a variety of their actions seem without any particular motive. But not the smallest exertion is ever made without it. The man who walks out and takes exercise, wants health or amusement as much as the working man does bread. Even those who toil in the rounds of pleasure, are always in pursuit of something. Their not finding the object is another part of the consideration; but they always have one in view. As to savages, and the poorer classes of people, they shew their propensity by a more simple process; that is, merely by resting inactive, when they are not compelled to labour.
-=-
[end of page #16]
enjoyed to create a certain degree of lassitude and indifference, which it does on every nation. {19}
Whatever may be the accidental circumstance which first raises one nation above others, or the train of adventitious ones that increase for a while and continue that superiority, nothing can be more clear and certain, than, that they have a natural tendency to come back to a level, merely by the exertions of men in the direction of acquiring wealth by industry, and without any of those causes which arise out of war, or interrupting the career of each other.
When, from the conduct of one nation towards another, or from whatever other cause war, =sic= becomes the means by which the superiority of two nations is to be decided, there are many things in favour of the least wealthy nation.
It has less to protect and to lose, and more to attack and to gain; the task is much easier and more alluring. There is a sort of energy in attempting to obtain, that is not to be found in those who are only exerting themselves to keep, of which it is difficult to explain the cause, but of which the existence is very certain.
Where natural strength, and the struggle with want is great, as is the case with nations who have made but little progress in acquiring wealth, the contest with a people more enervated by ease, and less inured to toil is very unequal, and does more than compensate those artificial aids which are derived from the possession of property. {20} From this cause, the triumph of poorer over more wealthy nations has generally arisen, and, in most cases, has occasioned the contest to end in favour of the more hardy and poorer people.
Of the revolutions that took place in the ancient world; whether operated by degrees or by violence and suddenly, those may be ge-
---
{19} Doctor Garth, in his admirable poem of the Dispensary, says;--
"Even health for want of change becomes disease."
This is the case with nations sunk in prosperity.
{20} Why men should have been less tenacious to keep that which is fairly theirs, than rapaciously to obtain that which is not, is a strange thing; but nothing is more certain; and the effects of that propensity are very great, and its existence very general. In the ruin of nations, it is a most active and powerful cause.
-=-
[end of page #17]
nerally traced as the causes. In those ancient nations any considerable degree of luxury and military success were incompatible with each other; but, in the present age, the case is greatly altered. Military discipline is not near so severe as formerly, and bodily strength has but little effect, while the engines of war can only be procured by those resources which wealth affords; by this means, the decline of nations is, at least, now become a less natural and slower progress than formerly; the operations of war have now a quite different tendency from what they formerly had, and this effect is produced by the introduction of cannon, and a different mode of attack and defence; to carry on which, a very considerable degree of wealth is necessary. {21}
In former times, the character and situation of the people, the object they had in view, their bravery and the skill of their leaders, did every thing; but now the skill of leaders and the command of money are the chief objects; for there is not sufficient difference between any two nations in Europe as to counterbalance those: and, indeed, (except so far as military skill is accidental,) it is to be found principally in nations who have a sufficient degree of wealth to exercise it and call it into action.
We shall see that the first revolutions in the world were effected by the natural strength, energy, and bravery of poor nations triumphing over those that were less hardy, in consequence of the enjoyment of wealth, until the time of the Romans; who, like other nations, first triumphed by means of superior energy and bravery; and, afterwards by making war a trade, continued, by having regular standing armies, to conquer the nations who had only temporary levies, or militias, to fight in their defence.
The triumph of poor nations, over others in many respects their superiors, continued during the middle ages, but the wealth acquired by certain nations then was not wrested from them by war, but by an accidental and unforeseen change in the channel through which it
---
{21} An idea has gone abroad, since the successes of the French armies, that money is not necessary to war, even in the present times. It will be shewn, in its proper place, that the French armies were maintained at very great expense, and that a poor country could not have done what France did.
-=-
flowed. At the same time that this change took place, without the intervention of force, the art of war changed in favour of wealthy nations, but the changes took place by slow degrees, and the power of nations now may almost be estimated by their disposable incomes.
This change, however, has by no means secured the prosperity of wealthy nations; it has only prevented poor ones, unable by means of fair competition to do by conquest what they could not effect by perseverance in arts and industry; for, in other respects, though it makes the prosperity of a nation more dependant =sic= on wealth, and more independent of violence; it prevents any nation from preserving its political importance after it loses its riches. It does not by any means interrupt that progress by which poor nations gradually rise up and rival richer ones in arts. It has not done away the advantages that arise from superior industry and attention to business, or from the gradual introduction of knowledge amongst the more ignorant, thereby lessening their inferiority, and tending to bring nations to a level; on the contrary, by increasing the advantages, and securing the gradual triumphs gained by arts and industry, from the violence of war, it makes wealth a more desirable object, and the loss of it a greater misfortune. It tends to augment the natural propensity that there is in poor nations to equal richer ones {22}, although it, at the same time, augments the difficulty of accomplishing their intentions.
The superior energy of poverty and necessity which leads men, under this pressure, to act incessantly in whatever way they have it in their power to act, and that seems likely to bring them on a level with those that are richer, is then the ground-work of the rise and fall of nations, as well as of individuals. This tendency is sometimes favoured by particular circumstances, and sometimes it is counteracted by them; but its operation is incessant, and it has never yet failed in producing its effect, for the triumph of poverty over wealth on the great scale as on the small, though very irregular in its pace, has continued without interruption from the earliest records to the present moment.
---
{22} The present inferiority of Poland, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, and Portugal, compared with the rank they held in former times, is easily accounted for by looking at the scale of their revenues.
-=-
[end of page #19]
CHAP. III.
Of the Nations that rose to Wealth and Power previously to the Conquests in Asia and Africa, and the Causes which ruined them.
PREVIOUS to the conquests made by Alexander the Great, the history of ancient nations is confused, incomplete, and inaccurate.
During the contests of his successors, the intricacy and confusion are still continued, but materials are more plentiful, more accurate, and more authentic.
During the first period, excepting what is contained in sacred history, a few detached facts, collected by writers long after, are our only guides in judging of the situation of ancient states, some of which consisted of great empires, and others of single cities possessed of a very small territory.
Add to this, that great and striking events occupied almost exclusively the attention of historians. The means by which those events were produced were considered as of lesser importance.
So far, however, as the present inquiry can be elucidated, although materials are few, yet, by adhering to a distinct plan, and keeping the object always before us, we may arrive at a conclusion.
The countries that appear to have been first inhabited were Syria and Egypt, {23} both of them situated on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea; and as early as any authentic records extend, those were great and powerful countries in which agriculture and population had made great progress, and into which commerce had already brought many of the luxuries of the East.
The Phoenicians, a people differing in name from those who were subjected to the Assyrian monarchs, occupied that part of Syria, now called the Levant, directly on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea; they were the first who rose to wealth and power by arts and com-
---
{23} Reasons have been given in the preface for not taking any view of the situation of India, though, by its produce, it appears, at least of equal antiquity.
-=-
[end of page #20]
merce. Tyre and Sidon were the abodes of commerce long before the arrival of the Jews in the land of Canaan, situated in the adjacent country, with whom, in the days of David and Solomon, the Phoenicians were on terms of friendship and alliance, {24} assisting the latter to carry on commerce, and enrich his people. (See Appendix B.) =sic - there is none=
The whole coast of the Mediterranean lay open to them for navigation, as did also the Grecian islands, and as their own soil was barren, they purchased the necessaries of life, giving in exchange the rich stuffs they had manufactured, and the produce of the East of which they almost exclusively possessed the commerce.
The Egyptians were possessed of the most fertile soil in the world, bounded by the Mediterranean Sea on the north, and on the east and west by barren deserts. Their country was of a triangular form, and watered by the Nile, which, passing through it in its greatest extent, runs nearly down the middle.
Thus situated, in the country depending on the Nile for its fertility, and on all sides protected from enemies, it was exceedingly natural to cultivate the arts of peace, and it was not possible that it should be divided into many different nations, as in other countries in early times was the case, when sovereignty rose from parental authority, and when there was no natural bond between the heads of different families.
The great abundance with which the inhabitants were supplied, in years when the Nile overflowed in a favourable manner, and the uncertainty of future plenty were inducements for accumulation and foresight, which are not equally necessary in countries where the important circumstances of plenty or want do not depend on one single event over the whole face of a country, separated, besides, from others by a sea, which they could not navigate, and by deserts not very easy to pass over.
The difficulties of transporting corn, which were sufficient to deter the Egyptians from depending on a supply from other parts, did not, however, prevent other nations from applying to them in times of scarcity, and accordingly it was the granary of the ancient world.
---
{24} For farther particulars of this commerce see the Digression on the Trade to India.
-=-
[end of page #21]
To those natural advantages, the Egyptians added some others, different in their nature, but not less precious.
They enjoyed a mild government, and an admirable and simple code of laws. Their docility and obedience have never been equalled, and as one maxim, was, to admit of no person being idle, it is evident that the population must have increased rapidly, and that there must have been an impossibility to employ the whole labour of so many hands on the means of providing subsistence in a country, where the manners were simple, the soil fertile, and the wants few.
The surplus of the industry of Egypt appears to have been at the disposal of the sovereigns to whom all the lands belonged, and for which they exacted a rent in kind, as is the custom among the native powers on both peninsulas of India to this day. By that means, they were enabled to produce those stupendous works which have been the admiration and wonder of all succeeding generations, and of every nation. The city of Thebes, with the labyrinth; Memphis, the canals, and the pyramids would all be incredible, had not their singular structure preserved those latter efforts of industry from the ravages of time, and left them nearly entire to the present day.
The Phoenicians were a colony from that great country; for the Egyptians in general had a dislike to the sea. It is well known, however, that people who live immediately on the coast have a propensity to navigation, and it is probable that those Egyptians who left their own fruitful land to settle on the barren borders of Syria, were from the delta of Lower Egypt, which lies on the sea coast, and is intersected by a number of branches of the river Nile. {25}
It is not surprising that such a colony, following the natural propensity to naval affairs, and carrying with it the arts of dying and weaving, together with whatever else the Egyptians knew, should become under the influence of necessity, and in a favourable situation for arts and commerce, as much celebrated for commercial riches, as their mother country had long been for agriculture and the cultivation of the sciences.
---
{25} That the Phoenicians were from Egypt is not doubted, and their becoming a totally different people from being on a different soil and in a different situation, is a strong proof of the influence of physical circumstances on the characters of nations.
-=-
[end of page #22]
Tyre accordingly is the first example of a city becoming rich and powerful by arts and commerce, and though few details are known, yet those are of a very decided character.
The pride of the Tyrians appears to have been the cause of their fall, and that pride was occasioned by the possession of wealth, far beyond that of any other people then in the world. While they were great they aimed at monopoly, and were partly the cause of the rapid decay of Jerusalem. After the death of Solomon, they founded a colony, well situated for the extention of their own trade, which consisted chiefly in bringing the rich produce of Arabia, and India, into the western world. Carthage was placed on the south coast of the Mediterranean to the west of Egypt, so as never to have any direct intercourse with India itself, while it lay extremely well for distributing the merchandize, brought by the Tyrians, from thence in the interior of Africa, Spain, Sicily, Italy, and the parts that lay distant from the mother city. {26}
From the extent of its territory and situation, Tyre could only be wealthy; it never could be powerful, as the great Assyrian monarchy, which lay immediately to the eastward, prevented the possibility of its extention; and, as to power at sea, there was =sic= at that time no contests on that element; the most then that could be expected was, that it should have sufficient strength to protect itself, which, being on a small island, very near the shore, was not difficult. If Alexander the Great had not joined it to the land by an earthen mound, or mole, Tyre could never have been taken till some other power got the superiority by sea; which could not have been till after the Romans had conquered Carthage.
Babylon, which was the centre of the Assyrian empire, and commu-
---
{26} The best account of the commodities in which the commerce of the Tyrians consisted, as well as the best description of their wealth, and the cause of the downfall is to be found in Ezekiel, chap. xxvi. and the two following. It is perfectly distinct and conclusive with respect to the principal points of wealth, pride, and luxury founded on wealth.
The Tyre here spoken of is not the same taken by the king of Babylon, or Assyrian monarch long before Alexander's time, which only appears to have been a settlement on the main land belonging to the same people, and subject to the same prince.
-=-
[end of page #23]
nicated with the eastern part of Asia, by the river Euphrates, and by the Persian Gulf with India, was, as Memphis, of Egypt, a capital; but the Assyrians were not protected on all sides, like the Egyptians, from foreign inroads; they consequently did not cultivate the arts of peace and the sciences so much. On the east, were the Medes and Persians; on the north, the Scythians and Partheans; but, as the territory was fertile and extensive, under one of the finest climates of the world, the monarchs became rich and luxurious, which was the cause of their subjection, and they were always subdued by people less advanced in luxury than themselves.
The whole of these countries, Egypt, Syria, Phoenicia, and Greece, fell under the arms of Alexander. This was the first great and general revolution in that part of the world, from which Carthage alone, of all the ancient seats of wealth and greatness, escaped.
The triumph of Alexander was, no doubt, that of a great captain; but, except the destruction of Tyre, and the foundation of Alexandria, which changed the principal seat of commerce, there was nothing durable in his conquests. The reigning families were destroyed, and the dynasties altered; but, under his immediate successors, the Egyptians, the inhabitants of Syria, and the Greeks, had different masters.
It was after the foundation of Alexandria, and under the successors of Alexander, that Egypt became really a commercial country. Its wealth had hitherto arisen rather from the great population and fertility of the country, than from any participation in the trade to the East; but after Alexandria was founded, the seat of empire, which had always been in Upper Egypt, was established in Lower Egypt, canals were dug, and every means taken to make the passage from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean as commodious as possible.
Carthage began then to decline. Tyre was no more: and Alexandria was situated on the same side of the Mediterranean Sea, in a much more advantageous position for receiving the productions of the East, and equally advantageous for distributing them.
The Phoenicians never recovered their importance; and indeed it was not the interest of the Persian monarch to encourage trade by [end of page #24] the old channel of the Red Sea and Rhinocolura, but rather to come directly through the Persian Gulf, ascend the Euphrates, and cross the country to the borders of the Mediterranean, which was a way not much more expensive than by the old rout =sic=. As the greater part of the produce imported was to be consumed at the luxurious court of Persia, and in the numerous rich cities with which that empire was filled, there is no doubt that the way by the Persian Gulf was by much the least expensive; for even Solomon, King of Jerusalem, long before, though he lived at one extremity of the journey, and had ships for trading by the other channel, had carried on trade by this way; and, in order to facilitate it, had laid the foundation of the magnificent city of Palmyra, nearly in the middle between the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf of Persia.
Whilst those revolutions were effecting amongst the ancient nations on the continents of Asia and Africa, the Greeks, who had been the most barbarous of all, became, by degrees, the most refined; their learning and arts were all founded, originally, on the Egyptian learning; and though at last they carried them to a higher pitch than their masters; yet Egypt, for many centuries, was looked up to, even by the Greeks, as they were afterwards for a number of centuries by the Romans, and the other nations of the world.
The education of the Greeks; very different in some of the states from what it was in others, had, however, the same tendency in all; that tendency was to invigorate the body, and instruct and strengthen the mind. While this continued, we see them at first resist the Persians, though in very unequal numbers; and, at last, the Grecian vigour, discipline, and skill, subdue the whole of the then civilized world.
After the conquests of Alexander, the wealth and luxury of Asia were introduced into Greece, and indeed the Greeks refined on that luxury. At Athens and the other cities which might be said to give manners to the rest, shews, and theatrical representations were after that more attended to than the military art; and cabal, intrigue, and corruption, were introduced in the place of that manly, pure, and admirable love of their country, for which, in less wealthy, but in better [end of page #25] times, they had been so highly distinguished above every other people.
This was the situation of things when a nation, less advanced in arts, and uncorrupted with the possession of wealth, but which was still considered by the Greeks as barbarous, prepared at once to subdue the whole of them, and give a still more striking proof of the triumph which vigour and energy obtain over those who have only wealth; the possession of which, undoubtedly, gives a certain means of defence, though one very unequal to resisting a nation when excited by the desire of sharing its possessions, and yet vigorous and strong, not being unnerved by the enjoyment of ease and luxury. [end of page #26]
CHAP. IV.
Of the Romans. -- the Causes of their Rise under the Republic, and of their Decline under the Emperors. -- the great Error generally fallen into with respect to the Comparison between Rome and Carthage; Proofs that it is wrong, and not at all applicable to France and England.
IN the rise and greatness of Rome, there was nothing accidental, all was the effect of the most unremitting perseverance in a plan, at first, of petty robbery; which, as it extended, was honoured with the title of conquest; and, as it succeeded, has been considered as deserving the appellation of great.
It is true, that there were talents exercised, and methods practised, which deserve the highest praise, and are worthy of imitation. It is impossible to withhold admiration at the recital, but the end in view, from the beginning, cannot be justified.
Although neither the end in view, nor, generally speaking, the means employed, are deserving of imitation, yet we shall find more advantage from examining them than from the history of any other nation.
In the first place, so far as prosperity depends on good conduct, and good conduct depends on the state of the mind, the Romans are a most striking example. While they preserved the manners that first occasioned their rise, they continued to become more powerful; as they forsook these manners, their power abandoned them; and they, after having conquered all with whom they ever contended, because they had more skill or less corruption, were themselves overcome, by men infinitely inferior to what they had been, before they became enervated and corrupt.
The smallness of the territory, which the Romans at first possessed, laid them under the necessity of extending it, and drawing resources from their neighbours; who, being brave and hardy, could not be easily either robbed or subdued. [end of page #27]
The Romans began with robbing, and finished with subduing them all, but the modes they practised deserve attention.
It is in vain to think that superior bravery or skill would alone have done the business; those are often triumphant, but occasionally defeated. The Romans owed their gradual aggrandizement to a line of conduct that, whether in good or ill fortune, tended to make them the sovereigns of the world. A line of conduct in which, if it had been in human nature to persevere, they would have preserved the situation to which they had elevated themselves.
Along with this decided conduct, which seems to have arisen from something innate in themselves, or to have been occasioned by some circumstance that is not known, the Romans possessed a number of methods, in addition to personal bravery, by which they advanced the end they had in view.
When the kings were abolished, Rome was only a small, rude, irregular place, and a receptacle for plunder; inhabited, however, by men who had great strength of mind, and who possessed a great command over themselves.
Their moral code was suitable to their situation. To rob, plunder, and destroy an enemy was a merit; to betray a trust, or to defraud a fellow citizen, was a crime of the greatest magnitude. With the Romans, oaths were inviolable; and attachment to the public was the greatest virtue.