Chapter 1

======

CHAP. I.

_Introduction and Plan of the Work.--Explanation of what the Author understands by Wealthy and Powerful Nations, and of the General Causes of Wealth and Power_.

One of the most solid foundations on which an enquirer can proceed in matters of political economy, as connected with the fate of nations, seems to be by an appeal to history, a view of the effects that have been produced, and an investigation of the causes that have operated in producing them.

Unfortunately, in this case, the materials are but very scanty, and sometimes rather of doubtful authority; nevertheless, such as they are, I do not think it well to reject the use of them, and have, therefore, begun, by taking a view of the causes that have ruined nations that have been great and wealthy, beginning with the earliest records and coming down to the present time. {5}

--- {5} Dr. Robertson very truly says, "It is a cruel mortification, in searching for what is instructive in the history of past times, to find that the exploits of conquerors who have desolated the earth, and the freaks of tyrants who have rendered nations unhappy, are recorded with minute, and often disgusting accuracy, while the discovery of useful arts, and the progress of the most beneficial branches of commerce are passed over in silence, and suffered to sink in oblivion." Disquisition on the Ancient Commerce to India. -=-

[end of page #1]

I divide this space into three periods, because in each is to be seen a very distinct feature.

During the first period, previous to the fall of the Roman empire, the order of things was such as had arisen from the new state of mankind, who had gradually increased in numbers, and improved in sciences and arts. The different degrees of wealth were owing, at first, to local situation, natural advantages, and priority in point of settlement, till the causes of decline begun to operate on some; when the adventitious causes of wealth and power, producing conquest, began to establish a new order of things.

The second period, from the fall of the Roman government till the discovery of America, and the passage to the East Indies, by the ocean, has likewise a distinct feature, and is treated of by itself.

The rulers of mankind were not then men, who from the ease and leisure of pastoral life, under a mild heaven, had studied science, and cultivated the arts; they were men who had descended from a cold northern climate, where nature did little to supply their wants, where hunger and cold could not be avoided but by industry and exertion; where, in one word, the sterility of nature was counteracted by the energy of man.

The possessors of milder climates, and of softer manners, falling under the dominion of such men, inferior greatly in numbers, as well as in arts, intermixed with them, and formed a new race, of which the character was different; and it is a circumstance not a little curious, that while mankind were in a state at which they had arrived by increasing population, and by the arts of peace, slavery was universal: but that when governed by men who were conquerors, and owed their superiority to force alone, where slavery might have been expected to originate, it was abolished. {6}

--- {6} This fact, which is indisputable, has, at first sight, a most extraordinary appearance, that is to say, seems difficult to account for; but a little examination into circumstances will render it easily understood.

In warm and fertile countries, the love of ease is predominant, and the services wanted are such as a slave can perform. The indolent habits of people make them consider freedom as an object of less importance than exemption from care. While the rulers of mankind were indolent and luxurious, they were interested in continuing slavery, which must have [end of page #2] originated in barbarism and ignorance. But the northern nations were different; with them, neither the moral character, the physical powers, or the situation of things, favoured slavery. The services one man wanted of another were not such as a slave could be forced to perform: neither are men who are fitted for performing such offices disposed to submit to slavery. Shepherds may be reduced to the situation of slaves, but hunters will not be likely to submit to such a situation, even if their occupation admitted of it. Slaves can only be employed to perform labour that is under the eye of an overseer or master, or the produce of which is nearly certain: but the labour of a hunter is neither the one nor the other, it is, therefore, not of the sort to be performed by slaves. The athletic active life necessary for a hunter is, besides, unfriendly to slavery, if not totally at variance with it. What does a slave receive in return for his service? Lodging, nourishment, and a life free from care. A hunter is obliged to provide the two former for himself, and the latter it is impossible for him to enjoy. The same thing goes even to hired servants. In the rudest state of shepherds, there are hired servants, but men in a rude state never hunt for wages: they are their own masters: they may hunt in society or partnership, but never as slaves or hired servants. -=-

The progress towards wealth in this new state of things was very slow, but the equality that prevailed amongst feudal barons, their love of war and glory, and the leisure they enjoyed, by degrees extended the limits of commerce very widely, as the northern world never could produce many articles which its inhabitants had by their connection with the south learnt to relish and enjoy.

The intermediate countries, that naturally formed a link of connection between the ancient nations of the east and the rough inhabitants of the north, profited the most by this circumstance; and we still find the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, though no longer the seat of power, the places where wealth was chiefly concentrated.

The impossibility of the inhabitants of the northern countries transporting their rude and heavy produce, in order to exchange it for the luxuries of the south, gave rise to manufactures as well as fishing on the southern confines of the Baltic Sea; from whence arose the wealth of Flanders, Holland, and the Hans Towns. This forms an epoch entirely new in its nature and description, and its termination was only brought on by the great discovery of the passage to Asia, by the Cape of Good Hope, and to America, by sailing straight out into the Atlantic Ocean.

The nations that had till those discoveries been the best situated for [end of page #3] commerce no longer enjoyed that advantage; by that means it changed its abode; but not only did it change its abode, it changed its nature, and the trifling commerce that had hitherto been carried on by the intervention of caravans by land, or of little barks coasting on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, (never venturing, without imminent danger, to lose sight of the shore,) {7} was dropt for that bold and adventurous navigation, connecting the most distant parts of the world; between which since then large vessels pass with greater expedition and safety than they formerly did between the Grecian Islands, or from Italy to Africa.

Three inventions, two in commerce and the other in war, nearly of equal antiquity, formed this into one of these epochs that gives a new feature to things.

The discovery of the magnetic power of the needle improved and totally altered navigation. The art of printing gave the means of extending with facility, to mankind at large, the mode of communicating thoughts and ideas, which had till then been attended with great difficulty, and confined to a few. This placed men nearer upon an equality with respect to mind, and greatly facilitated commerce and the arts. The invention of gun-powder nearly at the same time changed the art of war, not only in its manner, but in its effect, a point of far greater importance. While human force was the power by which men were annoyed, in cases of hostility, bodily strength laid the foundation for the greatness of individual men, as well as of whole nations. So long as this was the case, it was impossible for any nation to cultivate the arts of peace, (as at the present time), without becoming much inferior in physical force to nations that preferred hunting or made war their study; or to such as preferred exercising the body, as rude nations do, to gratifying the appetites, as practised in wealthy ones. To be wealthy and powerful long together was then impossible.

Since this last invention, the physical powers of men have ceased to occupy any material part in their history; superiority in skill is now the great object of the attainment of those who wish to excel, {8} and

--- {7} It was forbidden by law, formerly, in Spain, to put to sea from the 11th of November to the 10th of March.

{8} In the divine poem of the Iliad, Nestor, for experience and wisdom, and Ulysses, for [end of page #4] cunning, are the only two heroes whose minds gave them a superiority; but they make no figure compared to Achilles and Hector, or even the strong, rough, and ignorant Ajax. To bear fatigue, and understand discipline, is the great object at present; for though, of late years, the increased use of the bayonet seems to be a slight approximation to the ancient mode of contending by bodily strength, it is to be considered, on the other hand, that artillery is more than ever employed, which is increasing the dissimilarity. Again, though the bayonet is used, it is under circumstances quite new. Great strength enabled a single man, by wearing very thick armour, and wielding a longer sword or spear, to be invulnerable to men of lesser force, while he could perform what feats he pleased in defeating them. As gun-powder has destroyed the use of heavy armour, though with the sabre and bayonet men are not equal, they are all much more nearly so. No one is invulnerable, even in single combat, with the _arme blanche_, and with fire arms they are nearly on an equality. The changes that this makes, through every department of life, are too numerous to be enlarged upon, or not to be visible to all. -=-

men may devote themselves to a life of ease and enjoyment without falling under a real inferiority, provided they do not allow the mind to be degraded or sunk in sloth, ignorance, or vice.

Those discoveries, then, by altering the physical powers of men, by changing their relations and connections, as well as by opening new fields for commerce, and new channels for carrying it on, form a very distinct epoch in the history of wealth and power, and alter greatly their nature in the detail; though, in the main outline and abstract definition, they are still the same; having always the same relation to each other, or to the state of things at the time.

This last period is then very different in its nature, and much more important than either of the others that preceded it; yet, in one thing, there is a similarity that runs through the whole, and it is a very important one.

The passions and propensities of mankind, though they have changed their objects, and the means of their gratification, have not changed their nature. The desire of enjoyment; and of enjoyment with the least trouble possible, appears to be the basis of all the passions. Hence, envy, jealousy, friendship, and the endless train of second-rate effects, appear all to be produced by that primary passion; {9} and as from

--- {9} The very learned and ingenious author of the Inquiry into the Origin and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, traces all this to an innate propensity to barter. But barter is only a means, and not even the means to which mankind shew the greatest pro-[end of page #5] pensity; for, wherever they have power to take by force or pillage, they never barter. This is seen both in an infantine and adult state; children cry for toys, and stretch at them before they offer to exchange; and, conquerors or soldiers never buy or barter, when they can take, unless they are guided by some other motive than mere natural propensity. A highwayman will pay for his dinner at an inn, as willingly as a traveller, because he acts from other motives than propensity, but he will strip the inn-keeper when he meets him on the road. -=-

this originate the wealth as well as the decline of nations, the history of the revolutions in wealth and power, during the two first periods, are by no means unimportant; besides, as their duration was much longer than that of the latter, they lead to a more certain conclusion.

The review of what has taken place will occupy the first book; and serve as a data for an inquiry into the nature and causes of the fall of nations.

The first part of the second book will be dedicated to investigating the internal causes of decline; that is to say, all those causes which arise from the possession of wealth and power, operating on the habits, manners, and minds of the inhabitants; as also on the political arrangements, laws, government, and institutions, so far as they are connected with the prosperity or decline of nations.

The latter part of the same book will treat of the exterior causes of decline, arising from the envy of other nations; their advancement in the same arts to which the nations that are rich owe their wealth, or their excelling them in other arts, by which they can be rivalled, reduced, or subdued.

After having inquired into external and internal causes; and the operation of each and of both, (though they never act quite separately,) accidental causes, will make an object for consideration, which will bring the general inquiry to a conclusion.

The third book will begin with an application of the information obtained to the present state of England: by comparing its situation with that of nations that were great; and, by endeavouring to point out a means by which its decline may be prevented.

Though we know that, in this world, nothing is eternal, particularly in the institutions of man; yet, by a sort of fiction in language, when the final term is not fixed, and the end desirable, what is known to be [end of page #6] temporary is considered as perpetual. Thus, the contract between the king and the people, the constituent laws of a country, &c. are considered as permanent and of eternal duration.

In this case, though the final decline of a nation cannot be prevented; though the nature of things will either, by that regular chain of causes which admits of being traced, or by their regular operation of coincident causes which is termed accidental, sooner or later put an end to the prosperity of every nation, yet we shall not speak of prolonging prosperity, but of preventing decline, just as if it were never to happen at any period.

Before entering upon this Inquiry, it may be well, for the sake of being explicitly understood, to define what I mean by wealthy and powerful nations.

In speaking of nations, wealth and power are sometimes related to each other, as cause and effect. Sometimes there is between a mutual action and re-action. In the natural or ordinary course of things, they are, at first, intimately connected and dependent on each other, till, at last, this connection lessening by degrees, and they even act in opposite directions; when wealth undermines and destroys power, but power never destroys wealth. {10}

Though wealth and power are often found united, they are sometimes found separated. Wealth is altogether a real possession; power is comparative. Thus, a nation may be wealthy in itself, though unconnected with any other nation; but its power can only be estimated by a comparison with that of other nations.

Wealth consists in having abundance of whatever mankind want or desire; and if there were but one nation on earth, it might be wealthy; but it would, in that case, be impossible to measure its power.

Wealth is, however, not altogether real; it is in a certain degree comparative, whereas power is altogether comparative.

The Romans, for example, may very justly be called the most

--- {10} Till a nation has risen above its neighbours, and those to whom it compares itself, wealth and power act in the same direction; but, after it has got beyond that point, they begin to counteract each other. -=-

[end of page #7]

powerful nation that ever existed, yet a single battalion of our present troops, well supported with artillery, would have probably destroyed the finest army they ever sent into the field. A single ship of the line would certainly have sunk, taken, or put to flight, all the fleets that Rome and Carthage ever sent to sea. The feeblest and least powerful of civilized nations, with the present means of fighting, and the knowledge of the present day, would defeat an ancient army of the most powerful description. Power then is entirely relative; and what is feebleness now, would, at a certain time, have been force or power.

It is not altogether so with wealth, which consists in the abundance of what men desire. The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, had wealth; and this, though, perhaps, not consisting in the same objects, was, perhaps, not inferior to ours at the present time; but as wealth, purely and simply, no comparison between different nations was necessary, farther than that men's desires are augmented, by seeing the abundance possessed by others; and therefore they become comparative, as to wealth. Without, however, entering into a long examination respecting the various possible combinations of wealth and power, which are something similarly connected in states, as health and strength are in the animal body, {11} let both be considered only in a comparative way; the comparison either being made with other nations at the same time, or with the same nation at different times. Thus, for example, in comparing the wealth and power of Britain now, with what they were at the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, we find that the merchants of Liverpool, during the first three years of last =sic= war, fitted out a force of privateers equal to the Spanish armada; and consequently superior to the whole naval force of England at that time; there can be no doubt, then, that both the wealth and power of the nation are increased. Again, if we find that our ships block up the

--- {11} A man may be very feeble, yet in very good health for his whole life-time. He may also have great strength, though he may not enjoy a very good state of health; yet nevertheless, health and strength are very intimately connected, and never can be completely separated. -=-

[end of page #8]

ports of Holland, and prevent their navy from venturing to sea, we must conclude, that the relative power of the two nations is altered, since the time that the Dutch fleet rode triumphant in the river Thames. But, if we want to make a comparison between the naval power of England and that of France and Spain, we must not compare it with the strength of their navies in the year 1780, when they bid us defiance at Plymouth, but take things actually as they are at this present time.

When a nation is upon an equality with others, for wealth, it may be considered as neither deserving the name of a rich or a poor nation, whatever its real wealth or poverty may be. The same thing holds with power. When a nation is merely able to protect itself, but fully equal to that, though unable to make conquests, or aggrandize itself, against the will of other nations, it may be said to be neither weak nor strong. Thus, for example, Denmark as a nation is upon a par with others; and neither to be called wealthy and powerful, nor weak and poor, though it certainly has both more actual wealth and power than it had in the eighth century, when the Danes burnt London, Paris, and Cologne.

Thus, then, with respect to my reasoning, the whole is to be considered as applying to other nations at the same time; and the degree they are above or below par, is the measure of wealth and power, poverty and weakness. {12}

But, with respect to a nation itself, wealth is comparative in the progression of time. In speaking of power, we compare nations at the same period, and, in speaking of wealth, we may either compare a nation with itself at different periods, or with others at the same time.

We shall not find any example of a nation's becoming less wealthy whilst it increased in power; but we shall find many instances of nations becoming wealthy whilst they were losing their power, though,

--- {12} According to this definition, if all the nations on earth were to increase in wealth and power equally, they would be considered as stationary; their relative situations would remain the same; like those of the fixed stars, or those of soldiers who march in a regiment with perfect regularity, and retain their relative portion in the same manner as if they stood still. But this case, among nations, is only an imaginary one; therefore, the definition given answers the true purpose of investigation. -=-

[end of page #9]

together with the power, the wealth always, a little sooner or a little later, vanishes away.

Sometimes nations owe their wealth and greatness to accidental causes, that, from their nature, must vanish away; and sometimes to causes which, depending upon the nations themselves, may be prolonged. In general, both the two sorts of causes have united to render every nation great that has been distinguished amongst others for riches or power.

The causes, then, divide themselves into two of distinct kinds;--those which are independent of the nation itself, and those over which it has some degree of influence and controul.

In early ages, when knowledge was but little advanced, and when the small stock that had been accumulated was confined nearly to a single spot, the first description of causes were the principal ones.--Local situation, priority in discovery, or in establishment, gave to one nation a superiority over others, and occasioned the accumulation of wealth, and the acquisition of power and territory. {13} As in the early stages of human life, a few years more or less occasion a greater difference, both in physical powers and mental faculties, than any difference of innate genius, or adventitious circumstances; so, in the early days of the world, when it was young in knowledge, and scanty in population, priority of settlement gave a great advantage to one nation over others, and, of consequence, enabled them to rule over others; thus the Assyrian and Egyptian empires were great, powerful, and extensive, while the nations that were beyond their reach were divided into small states or kingdoms, on the most contemptible scale.

Time, however, did away the advantages resulting from priority of establishment.

Local situation was another cause of superiority, of a more permanent nature; but this, also, new discovery has transferred from one na-

--- {13} It is not meant, by any means, to enter into an inquiry, much less controversy, respecting the antiquity of mankind; but it is very clear that the knowledge of arts and sciences can be traced to an infant state about two thousand years before the Christian aera. -=-

[end of page #10]

tion to another. Qualities of the soil and climate are counteracted by the nature and habits of the inhabitants, which frequently, in the end, give the superiority where there was at first an inferiority.

If ever the nations of the world come to a state of permanence, (which in all probability will never be the case,) it must be when population is nearly proportioned to the means of subsistence in different parts; when knowledge is nearly equally distributed and when no great discoveries remain to be made either in arts, science, or geography.

While the causes from which wealth and power rise in a superior degree, are liable to change from one nation to another, wealth and power must be liable to the same alterations and changes of place; so long any equal balance among nations must be artificial. But when circumstances become similar, and when the pressure becomes equal on all sides, then nations, like the particles of a fluid, though free to move, having lost their impulse, will remain at rest.

If such a state of things should ever arrive, then the wealth and power would be only real, not comparative. The whole might be very rich, very affluent, and possess great abundance of every thing, either for enjoyment or for defence, without one nation having an advantage over another: they would be on an equality.

But this state of things is far from being likely soon to take place. Population is far from come to its equilibrium, and knowledge {14} is farther distant still. Russia and America, in particular, are both behind in population, and the inhabitants of the latter country are far from being on a par in knowledge with the rest of Europe; when they become so, the balance will be overturned, and must be re-established anew.

The great discoveries that have taken place in knowledge and geography have been connected.

While navigation was little understood, the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, and the islands in it, were naturally the first places for wealth and commerce.

The discovery of the compass, and others that followed, rendered

--- {14} By knowledge is only meant the knowledge of the arts that make men useful, =sic= such as agriculture, manufactures, legislation, &c. -=-

[end of page #11]

the navigation of the open ocean, more easy and safe than that of the circumscribed seas. This laid a great foundation for change and discovery; it brought Britain into importance, ruined Italy, Genoa, Venice, &c. and has laid the foundation for further changes still.

As for discoveries in arts, it would be bold and presumptuous indeed to attempt to set any bounds to them. Discoveries, however, that alter the relations of mankind very materially, are probably near at an end. In arts they give only a temporary preference. {15} If a method should be discovered to cultivate a field with half the trouble, and to double the produce, which seems very possible, it would be a great discovery, and alter the general state of mankind considerably; but it would soon be extended to all nations, as the use of gunpowder has been. New produce, or means of procuring the old more easily, are the things chiefly sought after. Potatoes, coffee, tea, sugar, cotton, silk, distilled spirits, are new productions, unknown to the Romans. Glass, gunpowder, printing, windmills, watermills, steam-engines, and the most part of spinning and weaving machines, are new inventions, but they can be extended to all countries. The mariners compass changed the relative position of places, and no new invention of the same importance, as to its effects on nations, probably can take place. Navigation does not admit of a similar improvement to that which it has received. If goods could be conveyed for a quarter of the present price it would not produce the same sort of effect. To render navigating the ocean practicable was a greater thing than any possible improvement on that practicability.

As for new discoveries in geography, they are nearly at an end. The form and the extent of the earth are known, and the habitable regions are nearly all explored.

We have, then, arrived at a state of things where many of the causes that formerly operated on reducing wealthy nations can never again produce a similar effect. But still there are other causes which ope-

--- {15} The end of all discovery is to supply men with what they want; and, accordingly, all nations that are considered as civilised find the means of participating in the advantage of a new discovery, by imitating that which possesses the invention first, and that is done almost immediately. It was very different formerly. -=-

[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.

As they had neither arts nor commerce, and but very little territory, plunder was their means of subsistence; it was to them a regular source of wealth, and it was distributed with perfect impartiality; they were in fact an association; the wealth of the public, and of the individual, were, to a certain degree, the same; they were as an incorporated company, in which private interest conspired with the love of their country to forward the general interest.

Plundering and pillage, as well as the modes of dividing the spoil, were reduced to system and method; and the religious observation of oaths was conducive to the success of both. Every soldier was sworn to be faithful to his country, both in fighting its battles, and in giving a rigid account of whatever might be the fruits of the contest. [end of page #28]

The moveables and lands taken from an enemy were sold for the benefit of the public; the former went wholly for that purpose, and the latter were divided into two equal portions; one of which, like the moveables, went into the general stock, the other was distributed to the poorer citizens, at the price of a small acknowledgement.

The consequence of this system was, a perpetual state of warfare; in which it was clear that the armies must obtain a superiority over neighbours, who but occasionally employed themselves in acts of hostility.

From such a plan of operations it naturally followed that they must either have been subdued altogether, or come off in general with some advantage, otherwise it would have been impossible to proceed. Of this they seem to have been fully sensible; for, with them, it was a maxim never to conclude peace unless they were victorious, and never to treat with an enemy on their own territory.

Acting in this manner, and engaging in wars with different nations, unconnected with each other by treaties of alliance; without any common interest, or even any knowledge of each others =sic= affairs; ignorant, in general, even of what was going on, the Romans had, in most cases, a great advantage over those with whom they had to contend.

There were in Italy some very warlike people, and those were nearest to Rome itself. The contest with those was long obstinate, and repeatedly renewed; but still the system of conquest was followed; and at last prevailed.

The consular government was favourable, also, for perpetual warfare. Those temporary chief magistrates did not enjoy their dignity long enough to become torpid or careless, but were interested in distinguishing themselves by the activity of their conduct while in office; whereas, in hereditary power, or elective monarchy, the personal feelings of the chief, which must have an influence upon the conduct of a nation, must sometimes, happily for mankind, lead him to seek peace and quietness. {27}

--- {27} During the interruption of consular government, by the decemvirs, though they did not reign long, the energy of the people was suspended, and their enemies found them much less difficult to resist. -=-

[end of page #29]

Even when the Gauls burned the city, the Romans yielded no advantages in treaty; they abandoned it to its fate, retired to Veii, and renewed the war.

In the art of war, the Romans had those advantages which men generally possess in whatever is the natural bent of their genius, and their constant occupation. Every thing that continual attention, experience, or example, could do to increase their success was attended to; and their hardy manner of education and living, with constant exercise, enabled them to practice =sic= what other men were unable to perform.

They accustomed themselves to heavier armour than any other nation. Their rate of marching was between four and five miles an hour, for four or five hours together, loaded with a weight of above 60lb. Their weapons for exercising were double the usual weight, and they were inured to running and leaping when completely armed.

The success of the Romans in Europe was not sufficiently rapid, nor were the nations they conquered sufficiently rich to bring on that luxury and relaxation of discipline, which were the consequences in those victories obtained in Egypt, Syria, and Greece; nor were the soldiers the only persons inured to such exercises, for the Roman citizens practised the same at home, in the Campus Martius.

No people educated with less hardiness of body, or a less firm attachment to their country, could have undergone, or would have submitted, to the terrible fatigues of a Roman soldier, which were such, that, even at a very late period of the republic, they were known to ask as a favour to be conducted to battle, as a relief from the fatigues they were made to undergo in the camp. {28}

In addition to this unremitting and very severe discipline, and to the inventions of many weapons, machines, and stratagems, unknown to other nations, they had the great wisdom to examine very carefully, if they found an enemy enjoy any advantage, in what that advantage consisted. If it arose from any fault of their own, it was rectified

--- {28} This happened under Sylla, in the war against Mithridates, which immediately preceded the fall of the republic. -=-

[end of page #30]

without delay; and if it arose from any new mode of fighting, or superior weapons, they adopted methods with such promptitude that the advantage was only once in favour of the enemy. {29}

The Asiatic methods of fighting with elephants, though new, never disconcerted them twice. If they knew of any superior art that they could imitate, it was done; and when the advantage arose from natural circumstances, and they could not themselves become masters of the art, they took other methods. Expert slingers from the Balearian Islands, and bowmen from Crete, were added to their legions; as, in modern times, field-ordnance and riflemen are added to ours.

It is impossible not to view with astonishment and admiration such wise conduct in such haughty men, whose simple citizens treated the sovereigns of other nations as equals; but that greatness of mind had a well-founded cause. They knew that the physical powers of men are limited, and that to obtain a victory with the greatest ease possible it was necessary to join together all the advantages that could be obtained; they knew, also, that war is altogether a trial of force, and a trial of skill, and that neither of the contending parties can act by rule, but must be guided by circumstances and the conduct of the enemy. {30}

This conduct of the Romans in war was supported by the laws at home. The equal distribution of lands, their contempt for commerce and luxury, preserved the population of the country in that state where good soldiers are to be obtained. The wealthy, in any state, cannot be numerous; neither are they hardy to bear the fatigue. Their servants, and the idle, the indolent, and unprincipled persons they have about them are totally unfit, and a wretched populace, degraded by want, or inured to ease and plenty are equally unfit.

--- {29} This conduct appears the more admirable to those who live in the present times that in the revolutionary war with the French, who invented a number of new methods of fighting, and had recourse to new stratagems, the regular generals opposed to them never altered their modes of warfare, but let themselves be beat in the most regular way possible. One single general (the Archduke Charles) did not think himself above the circumstances of the case, and his success was proportioned to his merit.

{30} The copying the form and structure of a Carthaginian galley that was stranded. -=-

[end of page #31]

It has been a favourite opinion among many writers on political economy that artists and workmen are cowardly and unfit for soldiers; but experience does not warrant that conclusion; though it is certain that, according to the manner the Romans carried on war, the bodily fatigue was greater than men bred up promiscuously to trades of different sorts could in general undergo.

So long as the Romans had enemies to contend with, from whom they obtained little, the manners and laws, the mode of education, and the government of their country, remained pure as at first. Their business, indeed, became more easy; for the terror of their name, their inflexibility, and the superior means they had of bringing their powers into action, all served to facilitate their conquests. But when they conquered Carthage, and begun =sic= to taste the fruits of wealth, their ground-work altered by degrees, and the superstructure became less solid. {31}

Wealth, as we have already seen, was confined to Asia and Africa, and of it the Carthaginians possessed a great share. It has long been the opinion adopted by writers on those subjects that the Carthaginians, as being a commercial and a trading nation, were quite an unequal match for the Romans; that in Rome all was virtue, public spirit, and every thing that was great and noble, while at Carthage all was venal, vile, and selfish. A spirit of war and conquest reigned, say they, in one place together with a spirit of glory, in the other a spirit of gain presided over private actions and public counsels.

This is all very true, and very well said, with respect to the fact, but with respect to the cause there is one of the greatest errors into which a number of men of discernment and ability have ever fallen. {32}

The true state of the case is easily to be understood, if we only

--- {31} It will be seen, in the subsequent part of this inquiry, that, in the present mode of warfare, the Romans would not have had equal advantage.--Skill, and not personal strength, is now the great object, and money to purchase arms and ammunition is the next.

{32} M. Montesquieu, notwithstanding his very superior knowledge, accuracy, and acuteness, enlarges upon this subject; and never takes any notice of the corrupt, mercenary, and degraded state into which Rome fell when it became as rich as Carthage. -=-

[end of page #32]

throw aside, for a moment, the favour for the brave warrior, and the dislike to the selfish trader. The fact was, that Rome, in the days of its vigour, when it was poor, attacked Carthage in the days of its wealth and of its decline; but let us compare Carthage before its fall to Rome in the time of the Gordians, of Maximus, or Gallus, and see which was most vile, most venal, or most cowardly. This would at least be a fair comparison; and nothing relative to the two cities is more certain, than that Rome became far more degraded, in the character both of citizens and soldiers, than ever Carthage was.

Wealth procured by commerce, far from degrading a nation more than wealth procured by conquest, does not degrade it near so much; and the reason is easily understood. Whenever a commercial nation becomes too corrupted and luxurious, its wealth vanishes, and the evil corrects itself. Whereas, a country that lives by tribute received from others, may continue for a considerable while to enjoy its revenues. This is so evident, that it would be absurd to enlarge on the subject.

The reduction of Carthage, and the wealth it produced at Rome, soon brought on a change in the education, the nature, and the manner of acting, both in private life and public concerns. The conquest of Greece, Syria, and Egypt, completed the business; and the same people who had conquered every enemy, while they retained their poverty and simplicity, were themselves conquered, when they became rich and luxurious.. =sic=

After the fall of Carthage {33}, Rome was fundamentally changed; but the armies still continued to act. Their ambition was now strengthened by avarice, and became ten times more active and dangerous to other nations. They then carried on war in every direction, and neither the riches of the East, nor the poverty of the North, could secure other nations from the joint effects of ambition and avarice.

But the Romans did not only get gold and wealth by their con-

--- {33} Considering circumstances, it is wonderful that the Carthaginians made so excellent a stand against the Romans: for a long time they were victorious; they fought excellently, even at the battle of Zama. The Romans could not say so much for themselves, when afterwards they were attacked by the barbarians. -=-

[end of page #33]

quests; they became corrupted by adopting the manners of the inhabitants of countries that had long been drowned in every voluptuous pleasure. Then it was that they ceased to trust so much to their bravery for their conquests; they began to employ politics and intrigue to divide their enemies. With the poorer states, they found gold a very useful weapon, and, with the richer, they employed weapons of iron.

The terror of the Roman name, the actual force that they could exert against a powerful enemy, and the facility with which a weak one could be silenced, till a proper opportunity arrived for his destruction, were all calculated, and force and fraud were both called into action.

Whatever truth or honour the Romans had amongst themselves, they at least had none towards other nations. They, in the most wanton manner, interfered in every quarrel between strangers; and, whenever it suited their conveniency to make war, they begun without almost being at the pains to search for a pretext. They set themselves up above all opinion, while, at the same time, they required all nations to submit to theirs.

In a city where all great offices were elective, the evil effects of the introduction of riches were soon displayed. The first great changes were, that the people became corrupted, dependent, and degraded; fortunes became unequally divided; the provinces groaned under the heavy contributions of generals and proconsuls; and, at last, the country splitting into factions, the government was overturned.

The splendour of Rome augmented, as a fiery meteor shines most bright before it falls; but the means by which it obtained the ascendency over other nations had long been at an end.

The same laws that had been found excellent, when the state was small and poor, did not answer now that it had become great and splendid. The freedom of the city, and the title and privileges of a Roman citizen had been very widely extended; they were therefore become an illusion, and a very dangerous one for the public weal; they served as a foundation for cabal and intrigue of every description.

Towards the latter days, after all those internal causes of decline, which are common to other nations had rendered Rome feeble, several [end of page #34] external ones began to act.

The provinces became exhausted, and those who ruled them gradually retained more and more of the money. {34} Thus, while the oppression of the provinces was augmenting, the resources of the state were daily on the decline.

The first effect of conquests had been to free the people at home from taxes; and when, in a state of poverty and simplicity, the effect was advantageous and tended to preserve that spirit by which the Roman empire aggrandized itself. After wealth flowed in from the destruction of Carthage, donations and shews were in use. The Roman populace, idle and degraded, clamoured for corn and public games. It is almost as difficult to conceive the degree to which the character of the people was degraded, as it is to give credit to the wealth and luxury of the great, in the latter days of the empire.

Agriculture was neglected; and the masters of the world, who had obtained every thing for which they contended, while they preserved their purity of manners, now became unable either to govern others, to protect themselves, or even to provide food. Sicily and Africa supplied the Roman people with bread, long before the empire had become feeble, and even at the very time when it is reckoned to have been in its greatest splendour in the Augustan age. {35} The cause of its decline was fixed beyond the power of human nature to counteract: it began by unnerving the human character, and therefore its progress was accelerated and became irresistible.

Of all the nations, into which luxury is introduced, none feels its effects

--- {34} The detached facts related of the wealth of the governors of provinces, compared with the poverty of the state, are, if not incredible, at least, difficult to conceive. They are, however, too well attested to admit of a doubt, though the details are not sufficiently circumstantial to enable us to know exactly how they happened.

{35} In the time of Augustus, the people depended on the supplies from Sicily and Egypt, in so complete a manner, that, if those failed, there was no remedy; and, at one time, when there was only a sufficient quantity of grain for twenty-four hours, that emperor was determined to have put an end to his existence: but the supply arrived in time. Such is the terrible situation into which a people is thrown, when agriculture and industry are abandoned, and when the population becomes too great for the production of the country!! This, however, was a very recent change. Till some time after the conquest of Egypt, Greece, and Sicily, it could not have happened. -=-

[end of page #35]

so severely as one where it comes by conquest. A people of conquerors, who are wealthy, must, at all events, be under military authority, and that is never a desirable circumstance; depending also on revenues which come without the aid of industry, they must become doubly degraded.

With such a people, it would be fair to compare the Carthaginians before their fall; for, to say nothing more than that the principle of traffic and commerce is founded on morality and virtue, in comparison to that trade of pillage which robbed and ruined all nations; the physical situation of the Carthaginians was preferable to that of the Romans in the days of their decline. This is evident, from the noble struggle that the former made, and the contemptible manner in which the mistress of the world terminated her career.

Montesquieu bewails the fate of a monarch, who is oppressed by a party that prevails after his fall. His enemies are his historians; and this reflection is employed in mitigation of the crimes imputed to Tarquin; but, surely, if true, on that occasion, it is no less so with respect to Carthage. All the historians that give us the character of the two nations were Romans and of the victorious party; yet most of them are more equitable than the historians of modern times, for they had not seen their own country in its last state of degradation and misery. Those who now make the comparison have proper materials; and it is the business of the writers of history to free it from the errors into which cotemporary =sic= authors fall, whether from prejudice, or from want of knowing those events which happened after their days.

In the case of the Roman historians, the error arose from a combination of three different causes. In the first place, they compared Rome in its healthy days and its vigour, to Carthage in its decline.-- They were, next to that, led into an error, by not knowing that all countries that have been long rich are liable to the same evils as Carthage. And, last of all, they wrote with a spirit of party, and a prediliction =sic= in favour of Rome. These three causes are certain; and, perhaps, there was another. It is possible they did not dare to speak the truth, if they did know it.

It is true, that the human mind is not proof against the effect pro-[end of page #36] duced by what is splendid and brilliant; and that success in all cases diminishes, and, in some, does away the reproach naturally attached to criminality. It is also to be admitted, that in the Roman character there was a degree of courage and magnanimity that commands admiration, though the end to which it was applied was in itself detestable. Even in individual life (moral principle apart) there is something that diminishes the horror attendant on injustice and rapacity, when accompanied with courage and prodigality.

It is no less true, that the manners of commercial men, though their views are legitimate and their means fair, are prejudicial to them in the opinion of others. Individuals, gaining money by commerce, may sometimes have the splendour and magnanimity of princes; but nations that depend only on commerce for wealth never can. No nation, while it continues great or wealthy, can rid itself of the characteristic manners that attend the way in which it obtains its wealth and greatness. Merchants owe their wealth to a strict adherence to their interest, and they cannot help shewing it.

The cruelties of the Spaniards have not excited the detestation they deserved, because they were accompanied with courage, and crowned with success; and that nation found means, in the midst of the most horrible of human crimes, to preserve an appearance of greatness and dignity of character. But the Dutch, who have gained wealth, like the Carthaginians, and though they were conquerors, never quitted the character of merchants, and they never possessed dignity of character, though they triumphed by virtue, perseverance, and bravery, over that very Spain which did preserve her dignity.

It is much more difficult to reconcile the character of trading nations with the qualities that are improperly called great, than that of any other. A commercial nation naturally will be just; it may be generous; but it never can become extravagant and wasteful; neither can it be incumbered with the lazy and the idle; for the moment that either of these takes place, commerce flies to another habitation. {36}

--- {36} It follows, from this, that a commercial people never become so degraded as those who obtain wealth by other means; but, then, it also follows, that they exist a much shorter time after they become so, and that wealth and power leave them much more speedily. -=-

[end of page #37]

The purpose of this inquiry being, to examine the effects of wealth, and its operation in the decline of nations; it appears to be of considerable importance to remove the error, in which historians and other writers have so long persevered, relative to the two greatest republics of antiquity; particularly as their example applies the most readily, and is the most frequently applied to two rival nations of modern times; although the parallel is extremely imperfect in almost every particular, and in some directly inadmissible. {37}

It cannot but be attended with some advantage to set this matter right. It may, perhaps, tend in some degree to prevent the French from attempting to imitate the Romans, when we shew them that a state, whether a whole people, or a single city, exempted from taxes, and living by the tribute of other countries, must, at all events, be dependent on its armies. In short, military government and tributary revenue are inseparable. We see how closely they were connected in ancient Rome. It is fit that its imitators should know at what rate they pay (and in what coin) for those exemptions from taxes, occasioned by the burthens imposed upon other nations.

In general we find, that all nations are inclined to push to the extreme those means by which they have attained wealth or power; and it will also be found that their ruin is thereby brought on with greater rapidity.

--- {37} The reader must see the allusion is to England and France; but, in point of time, their situation is absolutely different. France is farther advanced in luxury than England. Rome was far behind Carthage. The Romans exceeded their rivals in perseverance; in following up their plans, and in attention to their liberty. The contrary is the case with France and England.

The French, indeed, resemble the Romans in restlessness and ambition; but not in their mode of exerting the former, or of gratifying the latter: the resemblance, therefore, is a very faint one, even where it does hold at all. The English, in whatever they may resemble the Carthaginians, such as they have been represented, neither do it in their want of faith and honour, nor in their progress towards decline. The different wars with Rome, in which Carthage came off a loser and became tributary, though only for a limited time, were not the only causes of its decline. The trade of Alexandria, which was better situated for commerce, had diminished the resources of Carthage; so that it was, in every sense of the word, a falling nation. It will be seen, in the subsequent part of this inquiry, how, from the different modes of making war and also the different effects of wealth in the present times, the comparison is still less founded. -=-

[end of page #38]

Had the Romans stopped the career of conquest at an earlier period, they probably would not have so soon sunk into a state of corruption. It is very probable, that if Caesar had never attempted the useless conquest of Britain, he never would have succeeded in conquering the liberties of his own country. The reputation of having conquered an island, and the passage of the British Channel, made way for the passage of the Rubicon, and the battle of Pharsalia.

Conquerors must be paid as well as common soldiers: and though every man may have his price, and money and dignities may be a sufficient reward for the most part, there are some who despise any reward under that of royal power.--Caesar was one of those men; and both ancient and modern history shew, that though, perhaps, in his abilities, he has had no equal, there have been others who have rated theirs at as high a price.

The Romans at last became sensible, when too late, that they had pushed the spirit of conquest too far; and, as they had something great in all they did, they had the magnanimity to retract their error.

The greatest extent of the Roman empire being from the north of England to the Gulf of Persia, they consequently abandoned Britain, and those conquests in Asia, which were the most difficult to keep. The river Euphrates became the boundary, the Emperor Adrian having, in a voluntary manner, given up all the country to the north of that river, situated on its left bank.

The decline of the empire might have been as regular as the rise of the republic, had it not been for the different characters of the emperors; some of whom did honour to human nature, from their possessing almost every virtue, while others were such monsters, that their crimes excite the highest degree of horror and indignation, and are almost beyond credibility.

It is but justice to the Romans to observe, that though they robbed and conquered, yet their policy was to instruct, improve, and civilize those whom they had robbed and conquered, wherever they stood in want of it. They aimed, in every case, at making the most of the circumstances in which they were placed, and they very truly conceived, that it was more profitable and advantageous, to rule over a civilized than a rude people. [end of page #39]

After the great influx of wealth had corrupted Rome, its public expenses increased at an enormous rate, till at last that portion of the tribute exacted from the provinces, which it pleased the armies and the generals to remit to Rome, became unequal to the expenditure. Taxation of every kind then became necessary, in Italy itself, and the evils that attend the multiplication of imposts were greatly augmented by the ignorant manner in which they were laid on, by men who understood little but military affairs, added to the severe manner in which were they =sic= levied by a rude, imperious, and debauched soldiery.

The characters of soldier and citizen, which had been so long united, ceased to have any connection. Soon after this, the corruption of manners became general; and, at last, the Romans unable to find soldiers amongst themselves, were obliged to retain barbarians to fight in their defence, {38} and to bribe the Persians, and other nations, to leave them in a state of tranquility.

No nation that ever yet submitted to pay tribute, has long preserved its independence. The Romans knew this well; and if any one, having had recourse to that expedient, has escaped ruin, it has been from some other circumstance than its own exertion; or it has sometimes been the effort of despair when pushed to extremity.

Though, in many respects, Montesquieu's opinion of the affairs of Rome is by no means to be taken, yet his short account of the whole is unexceptionally just.

"Take," says that able and profound writer, "this compendium of the Roman history. The Romans subdued all nations by their maxims; but, when they had succeeded in doing so, they could no longer preserve their republican form of government. It was necessary to change the plan, and maxims contrary to their first, being introduced, they were divested of all their grandeur."

This was literally the case; but then it is clear that this compendium, only includes the secondary causes, and their effects; for the perseverance in maxims till they had obtained their end, and then changing

--- {38} This is exactly one of the charges brought against the Carthaginians in the last Punic war. -=-

[end of page #40]

them, which was not an act of the will, must have been occasioned by some cause inherent in their situation, which had gradually changed.

In searching for this cause we shall be very much assisted, and the conclusion will be rendered more certain, by observing in what particular circumstances, they resembled other nations who had undergone a similar changes. =sic=

In doing this, we find the inquiry wonderfully abridged indeed, and the conclusion reduced nearly to a mathematical certainty, by observing that the change of maxims, that is to say, the change in ways of thinking, whenever it has taken place, has followed soon after the introduction of wealth and refinement, which change manners, and consequently maxims.

Wealth, acquired by conquest, was incompatible with that austere virtue and independent principle which form the basis of republican prosperity.

As all public employments were obtained by the favour of the people; and as all wealth and power were obtained by the channels of public employment; bribery and corruption, which cannot take place in a poor republic, became very common in this wealthy one; so that this republican government, so constituted, lost all those advantages it possessed while it was poor.

Had the murderers of Julius Caesar, either understood the real corruption of the commonwealth, or foreseen that a new master would rise up, they would never have destroyed that admirable man. Had Rome not been ready to receive a master, Julius Caesar, with all his ambition, would never have grasped at the crown.

In nations that obtain wealth by commerce, manufactures, or any other means than by conquests, the corruption of the state is not naturally so great. The wealth originates in the people, and not in the state; and, besides that they are more difficult to purchase, there is less means of doing so, and less inducement; neither can they, being the sources of wealth themselves, become so idle and corrupted. {39}

--- {39} The wild and ungovernable direction that the French revolution took originated chiefly in the creation of assignats, which not only exempted the people from taxes at first, but had the effect of producing an artificial and temporary degree of wealth, that [end of page #41] enabled vast numbers, either in the pay of others, or at their own expense, to make cabals and politics their whole study. Rome never was in such a licentious state, because, before the citizens got into that situation, the military power was established. -=-

In the ancient nations that fell one after another, we have seen the young and vigorous subdue the more wealthy and luxurious; or we have seen superior art and skill get the better of valour and ignorance; but, in the fall of the Roman empire, the art and skill were all on the side of those who fell, and the vigour of those who conquered was not so powerful an agent as the very low and degraded state into which the masters of the world had themselves fallen.

It is by no means consistent with the plan of this work, nor is it any way necessary for the inquiry, to enter into the particular details of the degraded and miserable state to which the Romans were reduced; insomuch, that those who emigrated previously to its fall, and settled amongst barbarous nations, found themselves more happy than they had been, being freed from taxation and a variety of oppressions.

Though the Roman people are, of all others, those whose rise and fall are the most distinctly known; yet, in some circumstances, their case does not apply to nations in general. Had they cultivated commerce and the arts, with the same success that they pursued conquest, they must have become wealthy at a much earlier period, and they would not have found themselves in possession of an almost boundless empire, composed of different nations, subdued by force, and requiring force to be preserved.

The decline of nations, who become rich by means of industry, may be natural; but, the fall of a nation, owing its greatness to the subjugation of others, must be necessary. Human affairs are too complicated and varied to admit of perfect equality, and the relative situations of mankind are always changing; yet, in some instances, perhaps, changes might be obviated, or protracted, by timely preventives. But there is no possibility of keeping them long in so unnatural a situation, as that of a nation of wealthy and idle people, ruling over and keeping in subjection others who are more hardy, poorer, and more virtuous, than themselves.

Before the western empire fell, the following causes of its weakness were arrived at a great height. [end of page #42]

Manners were corrupted to the highest degree; there was neither public nor private virtue; intrigue, cabal, and money, did every thing.

Property was all in the hands of a few; the great mass of the people were wretchedly poor, mutinous, and idle.

Italy was unable to supply its inhabitants with food. The lands were in the possession of men, who, by rapacity in the provinces, had acquired large incomes, and to whom cultivation was no object; the country was either laid out in pleasure grounds, or neglected.

The revenues of the state were wasted on the soldiers; in shews to keep the people occupied, and on the purchase of corn, brought to Rome from a distance.

The load of taxes was so great, that the Roman citizens envied the barbarians, and thought they could not be worse than they were, should they fall under a foreign yoke. All attachment to their country was gone; and every motive to public spirit had entirely ceased to operate.

The old noble families, who alone preserved a sense of their ancient dignity, were neglected in times of quiet, and persecuted in times of trouble. They still preserved an attachment to their country, but they had neither wealth, power, nor authority.

The vile populace, having lost every species of military valour, were unable to recruit the armies; the defence, against the provinces which rebelled, was in the hands of foreign mercenaries; and Rome paid tribute to obtain peace from some of those she had insulted in the hour of her prosperity and insolence.

Gold corrupted all the courts of justice; there were no laws for the rich, who committed crimes with impunity; while the poor did the same through want, wretchedness, and despair.

In this miserable state of things, the poor, for the sake of protection, became a sort of partizans or retainers of the rich, whom they were ready to serve on all occasions: so that, except in a few forms, there was no trace left of the institutions that had raised the Romans above all other nations. [end of page #43]

CHAP. V.

_Of the Cities and Nations that rose to Wealth and Power in the middle Ages, after the Fall of the Western Empire, and previously to the Discovery of the Passage to the East Indies by the Cape of Good Hope, and of America.--Different Effects of Wealth on Nations in cold and in warm Climates, and of the Fall of the Eastern Empire_.

After the fall of the western empire, the Italian states were the first that revived commerce in the west of Europe, which they may indeed be said alone to have kept alive, with the single exception of the city of Marseilles.

Venice had begun to flourish when the barbarians took Rome; and Florence afforded a refuge for those of the nobility who escaped from their terrible grasp: but, for four centuries after, till the time of Charlemagne, there was, indeed, nothing that had either the semblance of power, wealth, or greatness, in Europe. The Saracens, as early as the seventh century, had got possession of Egypt, and had extended their ravages in Asia, to the borders of the Black Sea, having in vain endeavoured to take the city of Constantinople, and make themselves masters of the eastern empire, as their rivals, the Goths, had conquered that in the west.

The momentary greatness which shone forth in the reign of Charlemagne was, in many respects, like that during the reign of Alexander the Great. The power of each depended on the individual character of the man, and their empires, extended by their courage and skill, fell to pieces immediately after they were no more.

As the only permanent change that Alexander had effected was that of removing the chief seat of commerce from Phoenicia to the southern border of the Mediterranean Sea; so, the only permanent effect of the reign of Charles the Great was, his extending Christianity, and some degree of civilization, to the north of the Danube; {40} thus bring-

--- {40} The people to the north of the Danube had never been subdued by the Romans. In the time of Charlemagne they were Pagans, and in a most rude state of barbarism. -=-

[end of page #44]

ing the borders of the Baltic Sea within the limits of the civilized world.

Charlemagne paved the way for the greatness of the Flemings, the Saxons, and the Hans Towns, which began to flourish a few centuries after his time; but his own country was never in a more abject situation than soon after his decease.

The Danes took and burned the city of Paris, and they conquered, settled, and gave its name to the present country of Normandy. {41}

It would throw no light on the subject of the present inquiry to notice the quarrels, the feuds, and revolutions, that took place during the dark ages, and the reign of the feudal system, previously to the time of the crusades; when a wild romantic spirit extended civilization a little more widely than before, and laid the foundation for a new order of things, and a new species of wealth and power, different from those of the ancient world, the extent of which was bounded by the fertile regions of the south.

The first holy war took place in the eleventh century, and commerce and industry were introduced into the north of Europe very soon after. The Danes, who alone had power by sea in those times, exercised it by piracies and seizing all merchant vessels; particularly such as passed the Sound, from the Baltic to the North Sea. This rendered it necessary for the cities that had commerce to carry on to associate for the sake of protection, as the Arabian merchants had formerly done by land, and do to this day, to prevent being robbed by those who live by hunting and depredation.

This gave rise to the famous Hanseatic League, which began to become formidable towards the end of the twelfth century. {42}

As men living in northern countries have many wants unknown to those of the south, so the industry that began on the borders of the

--- {41} They were equally successful in England, but that country was not then to be considered as making any part of that world, with the revolutions of which this inquiry is connected.

{42} There is a dispute relative to this: but, as no writers give it a later date, and some give it an earlier one, it is certain that it must have existed at that time. Many disputes never ascertain the point intended, yet clear up something else that is equally useful. -=-

[end of page #45]

Baltic was very different from that which had flourished in ancient times on those of the Mediterranean Sea.

In this new order of things, Flanders, for its fertility, might be compared to Egypt, and Holland to Phoenicia, from its want of territory: but clothing of a more substantial sort, and conveniences and pleasures of a different nature being necessary, industry took a different turn. Besides this, the nature of the governments, where men were more nearly upon an equality, made it necessary to provide for their wants in a very different way.

Instead of building pyramids for the tombs of kings, industry was employed in procuring comfort for those who inhabited the country; and instead of the greatest art being employed on the fabrication of fine linen, and dying of purple, making vessels of gold and silver, and every thing for the use of courts, the art of making warm clothing of wool, and of fishing and salting fish, occupied the attention of this new race of men.

The Flemish had three sources of wealth at one time: they possessed the depots of Indian produce, and dispersed it over the north of Europe; they were the first who excelled in the art of weaving, and in that of curing fish.

The towns of Flanders and Brabant were associated in the Hanseatic League, and continued rising from the twelfth to the middle of the sixteenth century, when several circumstances operated in bringing on their decline.

The Hanseatic association was one arising from the circumstances of the times and from necessity. It was an artificial connection or alliance, where towns, subject to different governments, acted as independent states, entering into a society which treated on a footing of equality with kings, and made war and peace like any single sovereign. It was not to be expected that such a sort of alliance could greatly outlive the cause of its formation. But neither did the destruction of the league or federation, of necessity, draw along with it that of the towns of which it was composed. We shall see, however, that the general prosperity, and that of the individual members of the league, disappeared for the most part nearly together. [end of page #46]

The Dutch were far inferior to the Flemings for natural advantages; but they acted under the influence of necessity, which spurred on their industry; and no nation ever shewed so well how powerful its operation is: so that, though they were at first behind the Flemings in commerce and manufactures, they got the better, and became more rich and powerful. While the persecution of Philip, who was King of Spain, while his brother Ferdinand, Emperor of Germany, was at the head of the Austrian dominions there, and was a dependant of the Spanish monarchs.

--While the persecution of Philip, uniting the authority of the hereditary dominions of Austria with that of Spain, compelled many of the most industrious artisans, of that portion of the Low Countries that has since been distinguished by the title of the Austrian Netherlands, to leave their country, the Dutch provinces were making preparations to throw off the yoke of Spain.

[Transcriber's note: possible partly duplicated section, here reproduced as-is from the original.]

Not only did the Dutch become more wealthy than their neighbours, but they became also more tenacious of their liberty, more patriotic and free; for the situation of their country required economy, union, and patriotic exertion, even for the preservation of its existence.

After Holland had already made considerable advances towards wealth, it obtained great superiority by a fortunate improvement on the art of curing herrings. Though herrings had been barrelled for exportation, for more than two hundred years, it was only towards the end of the fourteenth, or beginning of the fifteenth century, that the present method of curing them was invented by the Dutch, which gave them a decided superiority in that article. {43} This prepared the way for the downfal =sic= of Flanders; to which its pride, and the mutinous spirit of the manufacturers in the towns did not a little contribute.

The decline of the Austrian Low Countries was brought on entirely by three causes; the oppression of the government, the Dutch excelling and supplanting them in arts and industry, and their own pride and insolence. At one time, Bruges, at another time, Antwerp, took on them to act as sovereigns, and as if independent, while, at the same time, the people were almost constantly disobedient to their magistrates. They had first become industrious under the influence of

--- {43} It was discovered in 1397, or soon after. -=-

[end of page #47]

necessity; but that was gone, and they could not continue in the same course, when in full enjoyment of wealth, and of every thing they wanted.

The Hanseatic Towns, from at first merely defending their trade against the Danes, became their conquerors at sea, and, in the years 1361 and 1369, they took and burnt Copenhagen, the capital, twice. Crowned heads became desirous of their alliance, and no power, at sea, was equal to oppose them; but their insolence to the Dutch, their oppressions of the English, of Spain, and other powers, laid the foundation for their decline in less than half a century afterwards. {44}

As the first three centuries of this extraordinary and unexampled association, were employed in protecting commerce and protecting trade, all those concerned in its success were ambitious of being admitted members, or received as friends: but when they began to assume the pride and dignity of sovereigns, and to meddle in political quarrels, to become irascible and unjust, their numbers diminished; and of those members that remained, the wealth and prosperity gradually began to fall.

The Dutch, by great industry, by a strict attention to their interest, and by keeping down pride, continued to increase in wealth, while the Hans Towns and Flanders were considerably advanced in their decline.

While this was happening on the northern shores of the continent of Europe; to which and to Italy trade had been nearly confined, Spain and Portugal, France and England, began to see the advantages of manufactures and commerce, and to encourage them. If money was wanted to be borrowed, it was either in Italy or Flanders, or in some of the Hans Towns, that it could alone be found; so, that though the monarchs of those days rather despised commerce, yet, as a means merely of procuring what they found so indispensably necessary, they began to think of encouraging it.

Spain had taken possession of the Canary Islands, and Portugal had made conquests on the coast of Africa, and seized the island of

--- {44} In 1411 they were compelled, by Henry IV. of England, to give him satisfaction for some of the injuries done. -=-

[end of page #48]

Madeira in the early part of the fifteenth century, and by an attention to naval affairs, and setting a value on possessions beyond seas, laid a foundation for those new discoveries which have totally changed the face of the world.

In Europe then, at the end of the fifteenth century, the nations were nearly in the following state. The Italians, possessed of the whole trade to India, were wealthy but feeble. They had more art, policy, and money, than other nations; but they had of themselves scarcely any effective power, except a little exercised by the Venetians and Genoese at sea.

The Hanse Towns, extending over the northern part of Europe and Flanders, which had become wealthy and powerful by their own industry, and a participation of the trade to India with the Italians, (though at second hand,) were on the decline, through pride and luxury.

Holland alone was advancing fast towards wealth, by industry, and an attention to commerce and economy. Spain and Portugal had turned their attention to new discoveries; and France and England were endeavouring to follow, though at a great distance, those who, in this career, had gone before them.

Of the places that enjoyed wealth, all were declining in power from the abuse of it; and Spain, which alone had possessed much power without wealth, was abusing it, by banishing industry from Flanders, and the Moors from their own country. In one case, there was wealth without power; in the other, there was power without wealth; and, in both, mistaken views and unwise conduct had laid the foundation for decline.

The other nations that had not yet either wealth or power were all seeking with great energy to acquire them; and they were successful in their attempts. Even Spain, which had unwisely banished the Moors, and thereby laid a foundation for its own decline and fall, found that event retarded for a century, by a most unexpected discovery: in consequence of which discovery it fell from a greater height at a later period. {45}

--- {45} It would not be to the purpose to speak at present either of Poland, Sweden, or Russia, or of the German empire, in which many of the Hanse Towns were situated. [end of page #49] The history of the Hanse Towns is very curious, and well worth attention: perhaps, next to that of Rome, it is the best calculated to illustrate the subject of this inquiry; but it is too long to be entered on. -=-

As for the eastern empire; held up by a participation of the commerce of India, and retaining still some of the civilization of the ancient world, it had sustained the irregular, though fierce attacks of the barbarians till the middle of this century; when, having very imprudently made a display of the riches of the city, and the beauty of the women, the envy of the Mahomedan barbarians was raised to a pitch of frenzy, that it would, in any situation, have been difficult to resist, but for which the enervated emperors of the east were totally unequal.

This added one instance more of a poor triumphing over an enervated and rich people. Nothing could exceed the poverty of the Turks, unless it was the ugliness of their women. But the case was not the same here as when the Goths and Vandals, from violence and revenge, attacked Rome merely to plunder and destroy. The Turks were, comparatively, from a southern climate themselves; though poor, they had been living amongst the wreck of ancient greatness, and they conquered with an intention to occupy and enjoy.

Thus was extinguished the last remains of ancient grandeur, in the middle of the fifteenth century. About fifty years before, many new sources of wealth were discovered, and the old ones were entirely converted into a channel that was new also. Thus, those who had, from the earliest ages, been in possession of wealth were preparing the way for enriching poor nations, that, from their geographical situation and other circumstances, never could otherwise have participated in it. [end of page #50]

CHAP. VI.

_Digression concerning the Commerce with India.--This the only one that raised ancient Nations to Wealth.--Its continual Variations.-- The Envy it excited, and Revolutions it produced_.

Before there are any authentic records, Syria and Egypt were populous; and the monarchs that ruled in those extensive countries had established their governments upon the plan that has more or less been adopted by all countries. There were different ranks of people. The same offices did not fall indifferently upon all. Wealth was unequally divided; and, of course, a foundation was laid for that commerce which consists in supplying the affluent with articles of taste and luxury, which are only produced in some countries; whereas, articles of necessity are produced in every country that is inhabited.

Commerce appears at first to have been entirely confined to the productions of the eastern and middle parts of Asia, which have, from the earliest periods, been sought after with great avidity by the people of other countries.

All that is most grateful to the taste, the eye, or the smell, is found in peculiar excellence in India. It is not to be wondered at then, if such objects of the desires of men were an abundant source of riches to those nations who had the means of obtaining them.

Egypt and Syria lay immediately in the road for this commerce. They were rivals, and many contests and vicissitudes were the consequence: for no commerce has ever created so much envy and jealousy. None has ever raised those who carried it on so high, or, on forsaking them, left them so low, as that which has been carried on with India.

Though at a very early period Egypt had a share of this lucrative commerce, yet the greatest part was carried on through Syria and Arabia, between the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea; that part now called the Levant, where Tyre and Sidon once stood. [end of page #51]

We shall examine briefly the changes of this commerce; the only one almost existing, in early times, or at least which gave rise to nearly all that did exist. {46}

As the common necessaries of life are found in greater or less abundance in every country, and as the population is in some degree regulated by their quantity, they made no objects of trade, except in the cases of famine. The precious metals, spices, jewels, and aromatics, rare in their production, universally desirable and easily transported, were long the chief objects of commerce; and the changes which this commerce has undergone and produced, amongst those who possessed it, greatly elucidate the subject of this inquiry.

The distance from Babylon to the Persian gulf, down the Euphrates, to where Bussora now stands, was not great, and across the country to Tyre there was little interruption; the Assyrian empire extending to the sea-coast, and its monarchs being too powerful to have any thing to fear.

There was, however, at a very early period, another channel, by which the Tyrians obtained the productions of the East, namely, by sailing up the Red Sea, or Arabian Gulf, and across Arabia Petrea to Rhinocolura. {47}

The Egyptians, at that time, obtained the same sorts of merchandize, by sailing likewise up the Red Sea, and landing at the western extremity; from whence they were distributed through Lower Egypt.

Commerce was carried on in this manner, and was nearly all engrossed by Tyre, when Alexander the Great, bred up under his father, who had been educated at Athens, and travelled through Greece,

--- {46} To carry on trade, capital is necessary; that is to say, there must be some means of getting an article before it can be carried away and sold. Spices, precious stones, and the other produce of the East, cost little or almost nothing amongst those who had more than they could use; and, as they produced an immense profit to merchants, they laid a foundation for those capitals that afterwards were employed in other sorts of business.

{47} Rhinocolura was merely a sort of sea port for embarking the merchandizes that had been brought across the desert from the Red Sea, It was situated at the south-east extremity or corner of the Mediterranean Sea, and till Alexandria was built was the nearest port to the Red Sea. -=-

[end of page #52]

turned his arms against those countries in which there was the most to be got by conquest, and from whom there was the least danger of defeat.

Before this took place, the pride and insolence of the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon had displayed itself on more than one occasion. After having been on friendly terms with the Jews, under David and Solomon, they became their enemies, and excited the King of Babylon to take Jerusalem; by that means destroying a neighbouring and dangerous rival. The wealth of these two cities had afterwards induced the Babylonians to attack them also. Sidon was taken and destroyed; and that part of the city of Tyre fell, which was upon the main land; but the Tyre that was the place of real trade, escaped the rage of the Assyrian monarchs.

Alexander seems to have determined on destroying Tyre, in order to found Alexandria, which he placed indeed in a better situation for the eastern trade. His romantic expedition to India had in view the getting possession of the countries which had produced those gems and aromatics that were so much sought after in the other parts of the world.

Had Alexander lived, perhaps he would not have found it in his interest to depress Syria; but the division of his conquests amongst his generals gave to Egypt and Syria two different masters. They were rivals, and then every advantage that nature gave to Alexandria was improved to the highest pitch under the Ptolemys.

The river Nile, much more navigable than the Euphrates, was also better adapted for this trade, because, in coming from India, it was necessary to ascend the latter, while the other was descended. Besides this, the flat country of the Delta was cut into canals, which greatly facilitated this channel of commerce. {48}

This was the first great revolution in eastern commerce. It was brought on first by the envy of Alexander and the pride of the in-

--- {48} It does not appear what returns were made to the Indians for their produce, therefore it must have been money. The trade then consisted in bringing from thence goods, comparatively weighty, and returning, as it were, empty. The current of the rivers being in different directions was then an object of importance. -=-

[end of page #53]

habitants of Tyre, and gave a very great superiority to Egypt, which was increased by the canals dug in that country, and the discovery of the regular monsoon, (a periodical wind,) which, at a certain time of the year, carried navigators straight from the mouth of the Red Sea to the Malabar coast. {49}

Under these disadvantages, flowing from superior prerogatives of Egypt, the commerce of Syria fell off almost to nothing, till, by another of those changes to which this commerce seems peculiarly liable, the Roman empire, which had swallowed up the whole of the civilized world, was itself divided into two, and one of the capitals fixed at Constantinople.

The channel through Syria obtained then a preference for all the eastern part of the empire; and owing to some change, either in the politics or religion of the Persians, when conquered by the Parthians, they became willing to permit them the navigation of the Euphrates, which had long been shut up.

This continued to be the state of matters, particularly after the fall of the western empire, when barbarians got possession of all that part of Europe that used to be supplied with East India produce by the way of Alexandria. It continued till the middle of the seventh century of the Christian aera, when the Mahometan religion was established from the westernmost part of Africa to the confines of the Chinese empire; and as the followers of that religion were unfriendly to commerce, and none could be carried on with India that did not pass through their country, it was nearly annihilated, and was almost wholly confined to the caravans of pilgrims, who, going to visit Jerusalem and Mecca, under the cloak of religious zeal, exchanged the various articles of traffic which they had collected in their different countries and on their journey.

--- {49} This passage, from the straits of Babelmandel to the point of the peninsula of India, saved a very long and dangerous navigation by the coast. It is almost due east, and with the advantage of being much shorter, and having a fair wind, was next to the discovery of the passage of the Cape of Good Hope, the greatest discovery for shortening the route to India. This was discovered during the time that Egypt was a Roman province. -=-

[end of page #54]

Such were the vicissitudes, changes, and variations of this commerce in early periods, and during the middle ages; and, when we come to treat of the same within the last two centuries, we shall find it equally liable to alteration.

Of all the spots on the face of the earth that have undergone revolution and ruin, they that are now the most completely sunk below their natural level, are those which were formerly the highest above it.

We have left uninterrupted the detail of the commercial greatness of those places, in order not to break the narrative; but as cities cannot be great without connection, it is necessary to notice, that Marseilles in France, and Carthagena, and some other places on the coast of Spain, were those, by which eastern luxuries came into Europe from Alexandria and Tyre. The Carthaginians, a Tyrian colony, had the produce from Tyre, and from Rhinocolura, and supplied Spain and the western portion of Africa; but when Alexandria arose, Carthage began to fall. Alexandria, situated near to it on the same coast, was a rival, not a friend, as Tyre had been, and the first Punic war, in which the pride of that republic had involved it with Rome, following soon after, hastened its decline. {50}

The nations of Greece, which had risen to power and wealth, owed these more to their superiority in mind, in learning, and the fine arts, than to any attention they ever paid to commerce; they had begun by being the most barbarous of all the people in that part of the globe, and got their first knowledge from the Egyptians, whom they long considered as their superiors in science, as the Romans afterwards did the Greeks; but when the barbarians broke down the western empire, learning as well as commerce was very soon extinguished.

It was the share of Indian commerce, settled at Constantinople, that tended more than any other circumstance to preserve that empire so long. To that, and to the barbarians having other occupation, rather

--- {50} Marseilles was founded soon after the city of Rome, but it was a government of itself, and made no part of ancient Gaul. The Gauls were warlike barbarians. The inhabitants of Marseilles were polished, like the inhabitants of other towns that enjoyed commercial wealth. They were always allies, and steady friends to the Romans, whom they never abandoned. -=-

[end of page #55]

than to any intrinsic strength of its own, did the eastern empire owe its long preservation.

A new channel for this varying commerce of the East, was opened, as civilization extended to the north of Europe, and this chiefly on account of the very small supply that was obtained through the Mahomedan countries.

Goods were transported by land from Hindostan and China, to Esterhabad, situated on the south-east corner of the Caspian Sea; from whence they were carried in vessels to the north-east corner of the same sea, and from thence by the Wolga and the Don; two rivers which rise in Russia, and, after nearly meeting together, fall into the Caspian Sea, and the Black Sea. By ascending the Wolga a short distance, and descending the Don, with only a few miles of land- carriage, the produce of India arrived at the Black Sea, and Constantinople became the emporium of the Indian trade. This was a great stroke to Venice and Genoa, {51} which rivalled each other in bringing the Asiatic commodities, for the supply of Europe, through the old channels. This jealousy of each other, and of Constantinople, was at its height when the crusades carried most of the princes and nobles of Europe to Venice and Constantinople. The Venetians, merely a mercantile people, with little territory or power, neither gave nor received umbrage from those warlike chiefs; but it was not so with Constantinople, the seat of a great empire; so that the crusaders and Venetians united against that power, and the eastern emperors were compelled to divide their city into four parts: the sovereignty of one part fell to the lot of the Venetians, who, for more than half a century, had by this means a decided superiority over both its rivals, and engrossed nearly the whole commerce of the East. The Genoese and Greek emperors now found

-- {51} In the chart which I have given, Venice and Genoa are put together, as if one, though they were rivals, and the prosperity of the one injured the other; but as nearly situated the same, and neither being considered as a nation, but merely as an abode of commerce, I did not think it necessary to distinguish them in the general history more than the variations that take place between the different cities of the same country. If, however, I should do the chart on a large scale, I should certainly separate them, and shew their rises and falls minutely. -=-

[end of page #56]

it their interest to unite against Venice, and the Genoese, by supporting their ally with money, expelled the Venetians from Constantinople. The imperial family was reinstated, and the Genoese had the suburbs of Pera as a reward for their assistance. This quarter of the city the Genoese fortified, and the Venetians were compelled to return to their old channels by Egypt and Syria. {52}

During those contests, Florence arose, and became a rival both to Venice and Genoa; and some degree of civilization, or, at least, a taste for the luxuries and produce of the East was brought into the north of Europe by those who returned from the crusades. The consumption of Asiatic produce in the North, occasioned depots to be established, and Bruges and Antwerp became to the north, what Venice and Genoa were to the south of Europe. The Hans Towns rose to wealth and opulence just about that period; but the effects of wealth acquired by commerce in the north were found to be different from what they had been in southern climates. Italy was going to decay, while three of its cities were increasing in splendour; but, in the north, the riches acquired by the cities set industry at work: manufactures were improved, and affluence and the comforts of life became more generally diffused than they had ever before been, or than they are in the southern countries even at the present day.

While Constantinople was thus rivalling the cities of Italy, a new revolution took place there, which overturned the Greek empire, and established that of the Ottomans.

When Mahomet II. mounted the throne, the Genoese were expelled from Pera, {53} and Venice regained the preponderance in eastern

--- {52} The depot of India commerce being in the Crimea, which is near the mouth of the Wolga, is a strong reason for believing the trade was carried on through the Caspian Sea; but it has been asserted, that the chief route was directly by land from the Tigris to the Black Sea. This seems a very good way; but, in that case, why cross the Black Sea to go to the Crimea? Any one who looks at the map will be able to judge that as being very unlikely. Doctor Robertson, however, has taken no notice of this difficulty. Two things are certain: that the depot was in the Crimea, and that merchants never go out of their road without having some cause for doing it. The reader must then determine for himself.

{53} Before the Genoese were expelled, their insolence and avarice had time to display themselves in their full extent; about the year thirteen hundred and forty, says an eye-witness, [end of page #57] (Nicepho[r/i]as [illeg.] Gregoras,) they dreamed that they had acquired the dominion of the sea, and claimed an exclusive right to the trade of the Euxine, prohibiting the Greeks to sail to the Chersonesus, or any part beyond the mouth of the Danube, without a licence from them. The Venetians were not excepted, and the arrogance of the Genoese went so far as to form a scheme for imposing a toll on every vessel passing through the Bosphorous. -=-

commerce, which she maintained, till the discovery of the passage by the Cape of Good Hope, which opened a new channel, more certain, much less expensive, and not so liable to interruption from the revolutions that nations are liable to. It is deserving of observation, that whatever alterations took place in the channel through which the India trade was carried on, whatever were the vicissitudes or the difficulties, the trade itself never was suspended; so great was the propensity of those who were affluent in the West, to enjoy the productions of the East. {54}

The vicissitudes of this eastern commerce were thus very great in former times. The wealth and arrogance which the possession of it produced, and the envy it excited, may, in general, be ascribed as the cause; indeed it is not certain whether the envy of the Genoese, at the success of the Venetians, did not make them, in an underhand manner, favour those attempts to find out a new channel which might destroy the prosperity of a haughty and successful rival. {55}

Whether it was so or not, it is certain that the discovery of the passage by the Cape of Good Hope was not accidental; but that the Portuguese were induced to listen to the proposal of trading to India by that route, under the certainty of rivalling the greatest commercial city of the world, if she should succeed.

Though no new channel can now be expected, and the present one is every day becoming more easy and frequented, yet the capricious shiftings of the India trade were not ended by this new discovery.

Instead of the contest being, as formerly, between cities situated on

--- {54} The prices of Asiatic produce were exorbitant. Silk was sold for its weight in gold; and a Roman emperor refused his empress the luxury, or rather the splendour, of a silk gown.

{55} Amongst the passions that get hold of rivals in commerce, that of envy is so great, when avarice is defeated, that, to humble a successful rival, they will meet ruin themselves, without fear, and even with satisfaction. -=-

[end of page #58]

the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, those maritime powers who navigated the main ocean became the contending parties.

There are only two ways by which wealth is accumulated and brought into few hands; the one by compulsion and levying taxes, the other by producing or procuring objects of desire; for a small quantity of which, people give up a great portion of their labour.

Sovereigns have amassed wealth and possessed revenue by the first means, and the use they have put it to has been magnificence in building, or in great or useful works, for war, or for pleasure.

The wealth obtained by the other means, of which the trade to the East seems to have been the chief, produced a different effect. In Italy it occasioned the invention of bills of exchange, and gave encouragement to the fine arts, and to some manufactures. In the north of Europe it infused a general spirit for trade and manufactures; for the luxuries of the East only served to teach the people of the north the necessity of acquiring comfort by manufacturing the produce of their own country.

To improve the arts of weaving, to make woollen and linen cloths of a finer texture, was very natural, after having seen the silks and muslins that came from India; particularly to people living in a cold climate, where a more substantial covering was wanted, and where the materials were in abundance.

It was, accordingly, in Flanders, and the adjacent country, that the modern spirit of manufactures rose up, nourished by the wealth which the ancient commerce of India had produced.

In the early ages, when the Tyrians had this trade, they amassed great wealth, though they had not any large countries to supply; for, probably, neither Egypt nor the eastern part of Syria would receive the produce by so circuitous a road. But, during the first ages, sacrifices to the gods and the funeral ceremonies consumed vast quantities of aromatics of every sort, as well as the enjoyments of the living. The two former causes of request for aromatics have long been at an end, owing to the changes in religion. They are now neither burned on the altar nor at the grave; and custom and taste, which are to a certain [end of page #59] degree variable and arbitrary, have lessened the consumption of some, and others have been supplied by the progress that we have ourselves made in manufactures. {56}

While this diminution of consumption took place, the western world was advancing in civilization, and the progress of wealth became vastly more extended; so that if the consumers of eastern luxuries were less profuse in the use of them, they were, at the same time, greatly increased in number.

The taste for tea, alone, which was introduced not much above a century ago, has alone, overbalanced all the others, and it is still augmenting in Europe; besides the discovery of a new quarter of the world rapidly increasing in population, into which the custom of drinking tea, as in Britain, has been introduced also.

The reasonable price at which an article can be afforded, always augments the consumption: and though we have no criterion to go by in judging of the prices in former times, yet it is certain they must have been very great. At the time when silk was sold for its weight in gold, that metal was compared with common labour of six times the value that it is now; silk was, then, at least three hundred times as dear as it is now; indeed, even that extravagant price scarcely accounts for the parsimony of the Roman emperor, who refused his wife a robe of that rich material. {57}

Though new discoveries have robbed Egypt and Syria for ever of the commerce of the East; and though the loss of trade was the proximate cause of the degradation, yet both countries had long been desolate and

--- {56} Wrought silks, muslins, and porcelains. Cotton stuffs are now no longer bought as formerly, so that, except in porcelain, the raw material is the only object of commerce. The silk worm was introduced into Italy during the time that the intercourse with the East was very difficult, and therefore had not the increase of wealth, and a taste for new articles extended the demand and brought a new one, the trade would at last have been nearly done away.

{57} The carriage is 24 L. a ton backwards and forwards, or out and home, which is only equal to what is paid in England by land for 500 miles. Indeed, none but articles of a very great value and high price could pay for the carriage by any of the channels hitherto discovered but that of the Cape. -=-

[end of page #60]

degraded before this change happened; for though the commerce came through their countries, the riches it produced centred in Italy. Syria had long become a desert, and the ruined palaces were become the habitations of scorpions, reptiles, and beasts of prey, long before those discoveries which seemed to have sealed their doom. That discovery only completed what had long been begun, and rendered permanent and irrevocable what might otherwise have been altered. {58}

At the rate at which this trade now goes on to increase, all the gold and silver mines in the West, will soon be insufficient to afford enough of the precious metals to pay for produce from that country: for few European manufactures are taken in return. This is laying a foundation for a great revolution, either in manners or in nations at some future day.

It is extraordinary that, from the earliest ages, the inhabitants of India have been receiving gold and silver from all other countries, and yet, that those metals are not so abundant there as with European nations. As our demand for the produce of the mines increases in order to send remittances in specie to that country, the mines themselves diminish in their produce, so that whatever change this may bring on, can be at no very great distance. {59}

--- {58} What Dr. Robertson says of Palmyra may be applied nearly to all the cities in Asia and Africa that shared in this commerce. "Palmyra, after the conquest by Aurelian never revived." At present, a few miserable huts of beggarly Arabs are scattered in the courts of its stately temples, or deform its elegant porticoes, and exhibit a humiliating contrast to its ancient magnificence.

{59} If the taste of the Anglo Americans for tea continues, allowing one pound to each person in the year, which is very little, one hundred millions of pounds weight will be annually wanted in less than half a century. -=-

[end of page #61]

CHAP. VII.

_Of the Causes that brought on the Decline of the Nations that had flourished in the middle Ages, and of Portugal, Spain, Holland, and the Hans Towns_.

The trade with India, which had been almost the only one, and always an occasion for envy and contest, was sought for by the Spaniards and the Portuguese; who, as we have seen, were the first amongst modern nations that seemed to aspire at naval discovery.

The manner in which Spain discovered America; and Portugal, the passage by the Cape of Good Hope, both nearly at the same period, and at the beginning of the sixteenth century, is too well known to require the smallest detail.

Europeans, with the superior degree of knowledge they possessed, and particularly that of the use of fire-arms: incited also by the love of gold; and careless of keeping their word with the unsuspecting natives, soon triumphed wherever they went, and the consequence was, that both nations brought home immense riches. The trade of Venice, Alexandria, and Aleppo, was all transferred to Lisbon, {60} and never was so small a country so suddenly enriched; and it may be added, more quickly deprived afterwards of the chief source of its wealth.

The Dutch had triumphed over the power of Spain, on their own soil, and they soon rivalled that of Portugal in the East. It was a very different thing to combat the natives, and to fight with the Dutch, who very soon deprived Portugal of the rich means of wealth she had discovered in India.

The prosperity of Portugal, arising from its possession =sic= in the East, continued at its height exactly a century. Its decline is accounted for by the following causes.

--- {60} Lisbon had its depot for the north of Europe, at Antwerp, and the value of the consignments have been estimated at a million of crowns, annually; but this is, probably, an exaggeration. -=-

[end of page #62]

Its domineering principles, too great an extent of conquests, which were widely scattered, and the haughtiness of the Portuguese, both towards the natives and Europeans; the envy and rivalship which brought the Dutch into the same countries; a great want of attention and energy; and, lastly, giving a preference to the trade to the Brazils. The Brazils had been first discovered by the Portuguese, afterwards seized upon by the Dutch, whom they, however, expelled about the middle of the sixteenth century; that is, about fifty years after its first discovery, and an equal period of time previous to the decline of their trade in India.

The possession of the whole of this lucrative trade, that had enriched so many great nations, and that by so easy a channel, and without almost any contest, for nearly a whole century, had so enriched the small kingdom of Portugal, that after being too eager, and grasping at too much, it was almost ready to resign the whole without a struggle, had it not been for some reasons of another sort. {61} So immense was the influx of wealth, from the united sources of India and the Brazils, that the former, which has been at every other period the object of ambition of all nations, and is so still, was considered as scarcely worth retaining.

It is almost unnecessary to add, that from that moment Portugal has been on the decline. If ever the cup of prosperity ran over, in large streams, it was then; and when the possession of the trade to India was scarcely thought worth preserving, it is clear that no great efforts could be made to encourage internal industry.

Spain, extensive and powerful before it discovered the Indies, did not so immediately feel the effects of the wealth imported, as the Portuguese had done; but its prosperity was of less duration, though the decline was not quite so rapid.

The Dutch must have known the effects of wealth on a nation, else

--- {61} It was debated in council, at Lisbon, whether it would be worth while to keep India, the wealth from the Brazils was so much more easily obtained. A scruple of conscience, least =sic= the missionaries should be destroyed, turned the scale in favour of retaining the trade of India!! -=-

[end of page #63]

they would scarcely have tried to throw off the yoke of Spain, at the very moment when it appeared in its greatest splendour and power. {62}

Insolence and pride, we have too often had occasion to remark, accompany wealth; and Philip was no more proof against its effects, than those potentates who had gone before him.--There was a great resemblance between the project of invading England, with the invincible armada, as it was called, and the attack on Greece by the King of Persia. That monarch must have thought very meanly of England, to suppose that the island could be conquered by 30,000 men, even if they could have made good their landing. Indeed, to try such an experiment on a nation that had supported its claim to valour so well at Agincourt and Cressy, and which was not, in any respect, degenerated, manifests his being blinded by the effects of wealth and greatness.

The consequence was, a gradual decline of the affairs of his kingdom; so that, in little less than a century, England placed a king on the throne of Spain.

Though the effect produced on Spain was not so rapid as on Portugal, it was, in some respects, more irretrievable. The vast numbers of persons who quitted that country, in quest of gold, injured its population, already reduced by the expulsion of the Moors, who were the most industrious of its inhabitants.

The wealth that came to Spain, came in a very unequal distribution, which is a considerable disadvantage, and hastens on that state of things which is the natural forerunner of the decay of a nation. Wealth, arising by commerce, however great its quantity, must be distributed with some degree of equality; but the great adventurers in the gold mines only shared with their sovereign, and the whole of their wealth came in prodigious quantities, pouring in upon the country. {63}

--- {62} Though the Dutch were subject to Spain, yet that had not prevented them from acting in an independent manner in their modes of following trade and commerce.

{63} We see an example of this in our own trade to India. Captains of ships, merchants, and all those who get money by that trade, come home with moderate fortunes; but the governors, and civil and military officers, who have been settled in the country, come home with princely fortunes, and eclipse the old nobility of the country. -=-

[end of page #64]

Both Spain and Portugal, finding that wealth came with such ease from India and America, neglected industry. This, indeed, was a very natural consequence; and, when the sources of their riches began to dry up, they found, though too late, that instead of having increased in wealth, they had only been enriching more industrious nations, and ruining themselves. The gold that arrives from the West passes through the hands of its masters with almost the same rapidity as if they were only agents for the English and the Dutch; so chimerical an idea is that of wealth existing without industry.

The Dutch were the only rivals of the Portuguese in the East Indies; for though other nations came afterwards in for a share, yet the transition from wealth to weakness was already made by the Portuguese, before any of them had begun to set seriously to work, in acquiring possessions, or in carrying on trade with that country.

Portugal thus fell, merely from the rivalship of a more industrious and less advanced nation, after having embraced more territory than she had power to keep. Spain fell, because she had embraced a wrong object as a source of riches. {64}

The Hans Towns, which owed their prosperity, partly to their own wisdom and perseverance, in the beginning, and partly to the contempt with which sovereigns, in the days of chivalry, viewed commerce, might, with very little penetration, and much less exertion of wisdom than they had displayed, have seen that the spirit of commerce was becoming general, and that moderation and prudence were necessary to preserve them in their proud situation; but the prudence which they possessed at first had given way to pride, and abandoned them; and the first great stroke they received was from Queen Elizabeth. The ruin of so widely-extended a confederacy could not be astonishing, and, indeed, was a natural consequence of the changes in the manners of the times: but it was not so with Flanders. There was nothing to have prevented the Flemish from continuing to enjoy wealth, and follow up industry, except in the rivalship of other nations,

--- {64} So short a time did the wealth remain in the country, that, when the famous armada was fitted out against England, a loan of money was solicited, from Genoa, for the purpose. -=-

[end of page #65]

particularly of Holland and England; for, though France was farther advanced, as a manufacturing and wealthy nation, than England, yet it was not in the same line of industry with the people of the Netherlands, whose prosperity was not therefore injured by it in the same degree.

As for the Dutch, they continued to increase in wealth till the end of the seventeenth century, and their decline requires a more particular attention.

In addition to their great industry, the fisheries, and art of curing fish, the Dutch excelled in making machines of various sorts, and became the nation that supplied others with materials, in a state ready prepared for manufacturing: this was a new branch of business, and very lucrative, for, as the machines were kept a secret, the abbreviation of labour was great, and the materials had still the advantage in their sale that a raw material has over manufactured goods; so that the advantages were almost beyond example.

Add to all this, that the Dutch were the first who established the banking system, (copying in part from the Italians,) on a solid plan. The advantages that Holland enjoyed were, indeed, all of its own procuring, but they were numerous and inappretiable, without counting the trade to India, of which it enjoyed a greater share than any other nation, for a considerable period.

No nation has shewn, so completely as the Dutch, how exterior enemies may be repelled, and difficulties overcome, while there is a true attention to the real welfare of the country. The exertions of the Romans, to conquer others, scarcely surpassed those of the Dutch to preserve themselves, when they were in a state of necessity; but, when they became affluent, energy and unanimity left them. The manufacturers became merchants, and the merchants became agents and carriers; so that the solid sources of riches gradually disappeared.

All this time, taxation increased, and though no nation ever allowed its manners to be less corrupted by the possession of wealth, yet there was a sensible change; but the change in the way of thinking was the most pernicious. Discontent with the government, and disagreements amongst themselves, completed their misfortunes, while England was [end of page #66] all the time endeavouring to supplant them in the most beneficial sources of their wealth.

The Dutch, fairly sunk by that rivalship, and natural change of things, which transfers the seat of wealth and commerce from one nation to another. There was no violent revolution, no invasion by an enemy; it was the silent operation of that cause of decline, which has been already mentioned in the Second Chapter, and will be farther and more particularly illustrated and explained.

The Dutch had a superabundance of capital; the interest of money was low; and wealth had begun to leave Holland long before the symptoms of decay became visible; by which means, the trade of other countries was encouraged, and, as always will be the case, capital emigrated, the moment it could find secure employment, and greater profits than were to be obtained at home. The leading causes of the decline of Holland may be distinguished thus:

The taxes were gradually increasing.

Its superiority in manufactures over other countries was continually diminishing; consequently, industry was not so well rewarded, and less active.

The merchants preferred safe agencies for foreigners to trading on their own bottom, thereby lending their credit.

Dutch capital was employed to purchase goods in one country and sell them in another: so that the Dutch became carriers for others, instead of manufacturing and carrying for themselves.

The trade to India, and the banking business, were both taken up by other nations; so that Holland then lost her superiority in these branches.

Thus circumstanced, Holland was gradually sinking, when political troubles, the end of which it is not easy to foresee, put her at the feet of France: an event that would not have happened in the manner it did, when the true spirit of patriotism reigned, that distinguished her in her more prosperous days. From this, at least, there is one distinct lesson to be learnt, that however it may be natural for nations to lose a superiority, owing to arts, inventions, or foreign trade, yet, if the minds of the people and their manners remain pure, they will not be degraded, by falling a prey to an enemy. When Holland was not rich [end of page #67] it resisted Spain in all her glory, during a very hard, arduous, and continued struggle; but then the people were united as one man: there were no traitors to raise a voice for Spain against their country. When Holland was wealthy, it did not even attempt to resist France when invaded; but then Holland was divided, and there were in every city men, who wished more for the plunder than the prosperity of their country.

In viewing the fall of those nations that sunk before the discovery of America, the eastern empire was the last that attracted attention. It had been reduced by the Turks, with a vigour and energy that promised a renovation, which, however, it did not effect. The Turks brought with them the Mahometan religion, which has debased the manners and degraded the minds of every people. Constantinople, by this change, lost the remains of ancient learning and of commerce, which even the weakness of the emperors, and the repeated wars, had not been able entirely to destroy. The Greeks were reduced to a state of subordination and slavery, but the Turks were not civilized. They adopted what was luxurious and effeminate of Grecian manners, yet still retained their former ignorance and ferocity. Amongst modern nations, the Turkish government is, in form, a monster, and its existence an enigma; yet it extended its sway over all that was most valuable or most splendid in the ancient world. Greece, Egypt, Phoenicia, Syria, the three Arabias, and countries then but little known, are subject to a brutish people, who do not even condescend to mix with the inhabitants of the country, but who rule over them in a manner the most humiliating and disgraceful. {65}

The Turkish government has never been powerful. The city of Venice was always its equal at sea; and, as it disdains to adopt the systems of other nations, it is every day becoming weaker, in comparison with them. It has formerly maintained successful struggles against

--- {65} In all other conquests, the conquered and the conquerors have become, at last, one people, when they have settled in the same country, whether Christians or Pagans; but the Turks and Greeks keep as distinct to this day as at the first, and this is probably owing to the nature of the Turkish religion. ---

[end of page #68]

Germany, Poland, and Russia; but that time is now over, and it owes its present existence to the jealousy of other powers. It is possessed of a greater quantity of good territory than all the leading nations of Europe, Russia excepted; and it is not the interest of men living in less favoured climates, to endeavour to renovate the country of Alexander, and of the other great nations of antiquity.

The Turkish nation is represented as greatly on the decline, but, soon after its establishment, it had every vice that could well exist in a government, and its greatest weakness now arises more from the alteration produced in other nations for the better, than in itself for the worse. The difficulty of keeping people in ignorance is becoming every day greater; and when the Ottoman throne falls the usual order of things will be reversed. For, as other governments may attribute their destruction to corruption of manners, and to ignorance, the Turkish government looks there for its security; and the day that any reasonable degree of light breaks in amongst its subjects will be its last.

To endeavour tracing the causes of decline in a state that owes its existence to its defects, and is in every respect different from other nations, would be useless in the present Inquiry, it has only been noticed to shew, that, in the infinite variety of things, some may owe their existence to what is in general the cause of destruction. [end of page #69]

CHAP. VII. [=sic=--error in printer's copy, should read VIII.]

_General View and Analysis of the Causes that operated in producing the Decline of all Nations, with a Chart, representing the Rise, Fall, and Migrations of Wealth, in all different Countries, from the Year 1500, before the Birth of Christ, to the End of the Eighteenth Century, --a Period of 3300 Years_.

From the revolutions that have taken place amongst wealthy and powerful nations to the present time, though the origin has been owing to very different causes, and the decline and removal from one place to another has been attended with circumstances not similar; yet the same leading cause for that decline may not only be traced easily and distinctly, but is so evident that it is impossible for it to be overlooked or mistaken.

Local situation, or temporary circumstances, have always afforded the first means of rising to wealth and greatness. The minds of men, in a poor state, seem never to have neglected an opportunity, presented either by the one or the other, and they have generally proved successful, till energy of mind and industry were banished, by the habits of luxury, negligence, and pride, which accompany, or at least soon follow, the acquisition of either.

Where wealth has been acquired first, power has generally been sought for afterwards; and, where power came first, it has always sought the readiest road to wealth, by attacking those who were in possession of it.

The nations and cities on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, where arts and commerce first began, where agriculture flourished, and population had risen to a high pitch, carried on perpetual struggles to supplant each other; and, in those struggles, the most wealthy generally sunk under; till Alexander, the first great conqueror, with whose history we are tolerably well acquainted, reduced them all to [end of page #70] his yoke; one small and brave people triumphing over the Egyptian and Assyrian empires, where wealth and luxury had already produced their effects.

Though this triumph of poverty over riches was very complete, except in one single instance, it did not occasion any real change, either in the abodes of wealth, or the channels of commerce. Tyre, the richest commercial city till then, was ruined, to make way for the prosperity of Alexandria, which became the most wealthy; drawing great part of the commerce from Carthage on the west, and taking the whole from Rhinocolura on the east: but, in Egypt and Syria, Babylon and Memphis still remained great cities.

The whole of this ancient world was for a moment under one chief, but was soon again divided amongst the generals who succeeded to that great conqueror; and the Egyptian and Persian empires became rivals, as Egypt and Syria had been before. The Grecian nations still remained the chief seats of civilization and the fine arts; and this continued till the Romans, originally a poorer people than the Macedonians, conquered the whole. This was the second great triumph of poverty and energy over wealth and grandeur, and, in this struggle, Greece itself fell.

The effects of wealth were not less formidable to the Romans themselves, than they had been to those nations they had enabled that brave and warlike people to conquer; so that the mistress of the world, in her turn, fell before nations that were rude and barbarous, but uncorrupted by wealth and luxury.

The conquerors of Rome were too rude, and too many in number, to become themselves enervated by wealth, which disappeared under their rapacious grasp, and which they neither had the art nor inclination to preserve.

This invasion of the fertile and rich provinces by men rude and ignorant, but who came from northern climates, established a new order of things; and only a small remnant of former wealth and greatness was preserved in Egypt and at Constantinople.

For several centuries of war and confusion commerce and the arts appear to have been undervalued and neglected; but still the taste [end of page #71] for oriental luxuries was not entirely banished, and, at the first interval of peace and safety, sprung up again. It was then that Alexandria, Venice, Genoa, and Constantinople, became the channels through which the people of Europe procured the luxuries of Asia. Babylon, Memphis, Palmyra, and all the other great cities of antiquity, were no more; even Greece had lost its arts and splendour; Alexandria and Constantinople were repeatedly assailed, taken, and conquered, by the barbarians, who envied their wealth, but who still found an interest in continuing them as channels for procuring to European nations the refinements of the East. Though Venice and Genoa were wealthy, they were but small, and of little importance; and all the nations who might have crushed them at a blow, only considering them as sea-ports of convenience and utility, allowed them to remain independent.

As an intercourse had been established between the northern and southern parts, a taste for the luxuries of Asia had extended to the shores of the Baltic, soon after the victorious arms of Charlemagne had carried there some degree of civilization, and the Christian religion.

Then it was that a new and more widely-extended system of commerce, but something like what had formerly existed in Tyre and Carthage, began in all the maritime towns of Europe, when Italy and Flanders became the most wealthy parts of Europe. A spirit of chivalry, and a desire of conquest, not founded on the same principles with the conquests of ancient nations, or of Rome, to obtain wealth, pervaded all Europe, and the greatest confusion prevailed. In the history of wealth and power, as connected together, this is a chasm. Those who had power despised wealth, and were seeking after what they esteemed more--military glory; and wealth was confined to a number of insulated spots, and possessed by men who were merchants, without any share of power or authority.

This extraordinary and unprecedented state of things gave rise to the Hanseatic League, which rose at last to such importance that those who had been so long seeking after glory, without finding it, began to see the importance which was derived from wealth. They began to see that, even in the pursuit of their favourite object, wealth was an ex- [end of page #72] cellent assistant, and the friendship of merchants begun =sic= to be solicited by princes, as in the days of Tyre and Sidon.

This progress was greatly facilitated and accelerated by the crusades, which, at the same time that they beggared half the nobility of Europe, gave them a taste for the refinements of the East, and taught them to set some value on the means by which such refinements could be procured.

In this manner were things proceeding, when three great discoveries changed the situation of mankind. {66}

The mariners compass, gunpowder, and the art of printing, were all discovered nearly about the same time; and, independent of their great and permanent effects, they were wonderfully calculated to alter the situation of nations at that period.

The navigation of the ocean, which led to the discovery of a passage to the East Indies, and of America, gave a mortal blow to the nations situated on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, who thus found themselves deprived of the commerce of the East.

The discovery of gunpowder, a means so powerful of annoying an enemy, without the aid of human force, which places a giant and a dwarf in some sort upon an equality, was wonderfully adapted for doing away the illusions of knight errantry, that had such a powerful effect in making war be preferred to commerce: while printing facilitated the communication of every species of knowledge.

It was then that northern nations began to cultivate arts and sciences, as those of the south under a mild heaven, and on a fertile soil, had done three thousand years before. But ingenuity and invention took a different direction in the north from what they had done in the southern climates; instead of sovereigns and slaves, men were more in mutual want of each other, and therefore a more equal division of the fruits of industry was required.

The manufactures of former times had been confined chiefly to luxuries for the great, and simple necessaries for slaves; and commerce, though productive of great wealth to a few, was in its limits equally confined.

--- {66} For the dates see the chart, and for their effects, chap. i. book ii. [Transcriber's note: See in the Chart "Mariners Compass /Gunpowder/Printing Invented 1300-1400"]. -=-

[end of page #73]

It was natural that the two nations which had first discovered the passage to the East, and the continent of the West, which abounded with the precious metals, should become rich and powerful, as those cities had formerly done that possessed exclusively the channels of commerce. Those two countries were Spain and Portugal; but here again we find the same fatality attend the acquisition of wealth that had formerly been remarked. It was, indeed, not to be expected, that the steadiness and virtue of the Spaniards and Portuguese could resist the operation of a cause, that neither the wisdom of the Egyptians; the arts and industry of Greece, nor the stubborn and martial patriotism of the Romans could withstand.

Those two nations soon sunk, and the Dutch, the French, and the English, became participators of the commerce.

Manufactures were a new source of wealth, almost unknown to the ancient world. Those begun first to be set in activity in Flanders, then in Holland and France, and, last of all, in England; but, like commerce, and every other means by which wealth is acquired, they have a tendency to leave a country. The cause and the effect are at variance, after a certain time; and though we cannot illustrate this from history, as we may the migrations of wealth arising from other sources, the tendency appears of the same nature, though with this difference; that men may always labour for themselves, and enjoy the fruits of their labours, though they cannot always find the means of being the carriers to other nations, or becoming merchants.

This alteration in the nature of wealth; the inventions of mankind; the alterations brought on by the facility of communicating knowledge; the systematical manner in which men pursue their interests, and other changes: give reason to hope that, in the present situation of things, those possessions may be rendered permanent, that have hitherto been found to be so evanescent and fugitive.

Where wealth has not been wrested from a country by absolute force, (in doing which the poorer nations were always successful,) it has emigrated from other causes, and taken up its abode amongst a new people, where circumstances were more favourable for its encouragement. [end of page #74]

Before we leave this recapitulation, it is necessary, however, to take notice of one revolution that did not take place on similar principles with the others, so far as wealth and luxury are in question; but which has in some respects a similarity, and, in others, is precisely the reverse.

About two centuries and a half ago, the Polish nation was one of the most powerful in Europe; Russia could not then, nor for long after, contend with it. The Prussians were its vassals; and the capital of the German empire, when besieged by the Turks, in 1650, owed its safety to the Poles, its brave and faithful allies.

Such was the case; but, at this day, the Polish nation is no longer in existence: it is subdued, parcelled out, and divided, amongst those very powers, to any of which it was at least equal, and to the others superior, at so late a period.

It may be asked, whether Poland was one of those states that has been borne down by its own wealth and opulence? If its ambition, injustice, or any of the other causes so prominent in the decline of nations, operated in the total extinction of it from the rank of independent states? Not one of those causes operated, but still it is not altogether an exception to the general rule.

When the feudal system was established all over Europe, nations under its influence were so far on an equality; and as they all emerged from that situation nearly about the same time, Poland excepted, they still preserved their relative situations. The Poles, during this change in other states, comparatively lost power. Amongst the alterations produced, was that of placing in the hands of the sovereign all the disposable revenue and force of a country, with which standing armies were maintained. Those irregular militias, till then composed of the barons and their retainers; a species of force, at best, far inferior to regular armies, became useless; but particularly so, after the modes of fighting had been changed by the invention of gunpowder, and the adoption of large trains of artillery, which could never have been employed in the feudal armies.

The disposable force of Poland and its revenues did not, by any means, keep pace with those of neighbouring nations; and what was still worse, the strength of that unfortunate country was divided; the [end of page #75] monarchy was elective, and foreign influence had a means of exertion, which, under a hereditary line of kings, is not practicable. Poland was not only weaker than its neighbours, but became a prey to intestine divisions, cabal, and intrigue.

Though Poland was not wealthy, according to the meaning applied to that word, it was a populous and fertile country, and therefore a desirable possession to the neighbouring states. To Prussia, a most ambitious and aggrandising power, with a military government, and of a very limited extent, it was peculiarly desirable. To Russia, extensive as it is, the fruitful territory was also an object of ambition, from its proximity to the seat of an empire, the most fertile and fine provinces of which lie at a distance. The same desire of possessing what they wanted, operating at the same time on two neighbouring nations, occasioned them to unite their power in a first dismemberment of Poland, for their mutual benefit. The interior convulsions of the country served as a pretext, and its weakness furnished the means of executing the design. In 1772, that independent country first lost some of its finest provinces; but this was only a prelude to its final fall.

The nature of ambition is to augment with success, and as the same divisions continued in the state, a pretence for a farther interference in its affairs was easily found; and, in 1794, Poland ceased to be one of the number of European states. In this last seizure, the house of Austria had no immediate hand. It was, however, necessary to have its consent: and, as the aggrandisement of Prussia was not an object of indifference to Austria, participation in the spoils was proposed, as the price of acquiescence, and it was readily accepted.

In this case, the weakness of Poland, and the ambition of its rivals and neighbours, were the immediate causes of its destruction; but that weakness arose from a want of true patriotism and proper attention in the people themselves. Jealous of liberties, and disobedient to their king, the Poles were slaves to the feudal proprietors of the soil. Though the first cause was different, yet their divisions and quarrels were the same in effect, as if they had proceeded from real causes of discontent, and a deranged state of society, such as we have seen, when the love of the country is lost. In Poland, that love of the country [end of page #76] was not lost, but it was badly directed, which is nearly the same thing; at least, it is equally dangerous.

Why, it may be asked, did not the other powers of Europe interfere? To this, indeed, it would be difficult to give a satisfactory answer. Those who did not interfere, probably, may have cause to repent their indifference. It was an infraction of that sort of federation of nations, which had been found necessary to prevent a repetition of conquests like those of Alexander, or of the Romans; yet, still there is a way of accounting for their conduct, though it cannot be vindicated.

In the first place, Poland lays =sic= remote from those powerful nations that have had the greatest sway in modern times. It was not very easy to interfere with great efficacy; besides, as Poland was previously under foreign influence, the essential evil was done. The example of partitions, indeed, was not given, but it is not impossible that some powers on the continent, though they got no share, might not be sorry to see such an example. Britain and Spain certainly could not wish for the example, but others might, and others probably did wish for it.

The first division was, besides, only a beginning; some degree of moderation was preserved, and Poland was only mutilated; it was not destroyed. The case was not entirely new, nor without example.

The second and last division took place at a time when the nations whose interest it was, and whose wish it might have been to interfere, had not the means of doing so. It was when the republican frenzy in France was at its most desperate height, and whom =sic= the whole of civilized Europe appeared to be in danger.

There is one more excuse to be found. The aspect of affairs in Poland resembled, with regard to its revolutions, those of France so much, that those, who at another time would have probably interfered, were rather inclined to co-operate in stifling a rising flame in the north, similar to that which had endangered the whole of the south of Europe.

In all this, the thing the most difficult to be accounted for, is the conduct of the Polish nation; but an inquiry into the causes of that would be quite foreign to the present subject: this is, however, an instance of the danger arising from not keeping pace with other nations [end of page #77] in those arts of government, and internal policy, which constitute the power of nations in the general order of things, whatever that may be.

Although we have seldom found intestine divisions carried to so blameable a length in any other nation that was not corrupt in itself, yet, it is clear, that the influence obtained by the wealth of its neighbours was at the bottom of those highly blameable, and dreadfully fatal divisions.

When aggrandisement is the aim of modern states, there will not now be any difficulty of pleading example; and there is one of those very powers that on this occasion participated in the division which has all the seeds of discord in itself that brought on the ruin of the Polish empire. That power has already felt the effect of example; and, though it may repine, it cannot complain, as it might otherwise have done; or if it does, it cannot expect equal commiseration.

EXPLANATION OF THE PLATE INTENDED TO ILLUSTRATE THE RISE AND FALL OF NATIONS.

In the chart, at the beginning of the work, the lines, from top to bottom, represent the division of time into centuries, each indicating the year, marked under and above it, in the same way that has been adopted in Dr. Priestley's Chart of Universal History, in works of chronology, and in statements of commerce and finance.

The countries that have flourished, whether by commerce, or any other means are supposed to be represented by the parallel spaces from right to left, according to the names written on the right hand.

The rise of the black part, something like a distant range of low mountains, shews at what periods the country was great; when its greatness began and when it ended. This plan would be unexceptionally correct, if the materials for it could be procured; but if they were, it would not lead to any very different conclusion from what it does in its present state. The times, when the elevation began, and its duration are exact. The rises and falls are, as nearly as I am able, estimated from existing documents.

The part shaded of a darkish colour, and growing gradually lighter at both edges, represent those centuries of ignorance which succeeded the fall of the Roman empire. [end of page #78]

At the bottom, on the part not stained, is a chronological list of events, inventions, and discoveries, connected with the subject. Those which are not, however, important or curious, have no place.

The commerce of France, Britain, Russia, and America, are upon a true scale with respect to their proportional amount, as well as to their rise and progress. The others are not, owing to want of documents; but, as before observed, the amount has very little to do with the subject; the business is to see how wealth and power were divided at any particular time, if they were rising or falling, or if they were at their height, comparing them with the manners of the people at the time.

This is the use of the chart, as to the representation of individual places and nations.

The general conclusion is, from taking the whole together, that wealth and power have never been long permanent in any place. That they never have been renewed when once destroyed, though they have had rises and falls, and that they travel over the face of the earth, something like a caravan of merchants. On their arrival, every thing is found green and fresh; while they remain all is bustle and abundance, and, when gone, all is left trampled down, barren, and bare.

This chart is a sort of a picture, intended to make those migrations and change of place distinct and easily conceived, on which the whole of this book has been occupied. Being once acquainted with the changes that have taken place, we may more accurately compare them with the state of this country at the present time. Those who will take the trouble to read Ferguson's History of the Roman Republic, and Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Empire, may form a judgement of the accuracy or inaccuracy of the chart.

EXAMPLE OF THE MANNER OF INSPECTING THE CHART.

To know when Rome was at the highest pitch of greatness, find, on the right hand, the space marked Roman empire: then look between the lines for the highest part of the dark ground, and look immediately under for the year, it will be seen to be at the birth of Christ, that is, during the reign of Augustus; and by the same means it will be found declining gradually till the year 490. [end of page #79]

In like manner, Carthage will be found at the zenith of its power about 300 years before Christ. The founding of Alexandria and the wars with Rome began then to diminish both its wealth and power.

It is intended by the author of this to execute a chart of the same sort on a very large scale, and assign to the different powers spaces proportioned to their importance, as nearly as he can ascertain.

With respect to the chronology of this chart, to prevent criticisms which might perhaps be made; but do not apply to it, according to the purpose for which it was constructed, the reader is requested to observe, that I am desirous of illustrating a very important investigation, by representing a very confused and long series of events. The result to be derived from this, is not to be affected by any small inaccuracy. In counting before the birth of Christ, having found many different opinions, and much uncertainty relative to dates, (which I neither have abilities nor inclination to investigate,) I measured backwards, without pretending to settle the year of the world, respecting which there are so many different opinions.

The materials for ancient history are few, and sometimes not much to be relied upon; but, in great leading facts, such as alone are of use in this picture, the authenticity is not to be doubted.

The Assyrian and Egyptian empires had attained wealth and power previous to the time at which this commences. They stood then, and for long after, as if it =sic= were alone in the world; their revolutions, and the rise, prosperity, and decline of other nations, are all represented.

I have not wished to continue the view of France, since the revolution, its present real situation is so imperfectly known; and, from what is known of it, it cannot be compared with any other nation, or with itself previous to that period. [end of page #80]

========