to compare with Schlegel's account of Mohammedanism, an
admirable, though briefer sketch of the same religion
by the hand of another great master--the illustrious
Goerres. In the Synopsis which he has published of the
Lectures on Universal History, that he has been for
several years delivering at Munich, we find the
following remarkable passage on the Mohammedan
religion. The author after speaking of the various
trials which the Christian church had to endure, says
"Hence the young church must wrestle with all the forms
of error in the Gnostic doctrines and in the other
heresies; one after the other she remains the
triumphant conqueress over all, and maintains against
every attack her well-balanced equilibrium. At length,
when the contest has raged for centuries, the enemy
combines in one focus all the scattered rays of error;
and the Prophet of Mecca knows how to balance himself
therein. The _rigid Monotheism_ of his doctrine, which
by denying the Trinity, and with it all personal
manifestation of the Deity, limits its idea to the
depths of Eternity, without admitting any true or
living communication of the God-head with what
appertains to time, naturally allures the metaphysical
pride which in this abstraction hath made itself its
own God. The _ethical Pantheism_ which this religion
professes, while it furnishes a pretext, a motive and a
palliation to all the pretensions of the mighty, to the
ambition of usurpers, the violence of pride, and the
arrogance of tyranny, and at the same time consoles and
disarms the injured and the oppressed, by the
inevitableness of destiny, must draw to its preacher
the men of the sword, of violence, and of blood, and
link those once bound indissolubly to him. The _sensual
Eudaimonism_, to which his creed opens so free a scope
both in this world and the next, must rally round the
apostle of lust, the multitude that burns with all the
passionate glow of that fervid zone, and place under
his controul all the wild fiery energies of that
region. And thus do the cold doctrine, the cutting
steel, and the destroying flame go before him as his
missionaries; and the South and the East, and soon even
a part of the European West, are bowed under the yoke
of his religion: and while in the Caliphate he founds
for it a new spiritual and secular empire, the modern
world between Christianity and Mohammedanism becomes
divided into night and day."--Goerres Uber die
Grundlage der Weltgeschicte, page 99-100. _Breslaw_,
1830.--_Trans._
END OF LECTURE XII.
LECTURE XIII.
On the formation and consolidation of the Christian Government
in modern times.--On the principle which led to the
establishment of the old German Empire.
The first three centuries of the Christian era and of modern history
compose the epoch when, by a second fiat of creation, the light of
Christianity spread through the whole Roman world, and when after
undergoing long persecutions, the religion of Christ under Constantine
came victorious out of the struggle. The second epoch or the
succeeding five centuries comprehend that chaotic and intermediate
state in the history of mankind, or the transition from declining
antiquity to modern times, growing out of the ruins of the ancient
world--the fermenting mixture of many and various elements of social
life. But when at last the tempest had disburthened itself of its
fury, the clouds had broken asunder, and the pure firmament of
Christian faith had stretched out its ample vault to shelter the rise
of new communities; when the wild waters of that mighty inundation of
nations had begun gradually to flow off; then the Germanic tribes
incorporated with the Romanic nations, laid the deep firm soil on
which modern European society was to spring up and flourish. For it
was Charlemagne who laid the sure foundation for Christian government,
and all the improvements of its subsequent superstructure. On this
basis of Christian government, and Christian manners, and under the
cover and vivifying influence of the luminous firmament of Christian
faith, sprang human science out of the small fragments of ancient art
and learning, which had survived all these mighty devastations, till
at last it expanded into a fuller bloom, and grew into a more heavenly
and Christian form. This new progress of social man under the
Christian form of government, and this progress of the human mind in
Christian science, mark the third epoch of modern history, or the
seven centuries which elapsed from the reign of Charlemagne, to the
discovery of the New World, and the commencement of the Reformation.
It may naturally be supposed that these seven centuries which
witnessed the progressive civilization of modern nations, and the
vigorous growth and wide spread of Christian principles, were at the
same time a period of struggle both in the state and in science, and
that in each of these departments, the spirit of Christianity was
intermixed with, and most injuriously and fatally thwarted and opposed
by, many unchristian elements. And indeed, to discover and
discriminate between these conflicting elements, to comprehend and
determine their mutual bearings one towards the other, is the fit
problem for historical philosophy. The progress of the Christian state
and the advancement of Christian science, form during this period the
main subject of an universal history, when this is not a mere
collection of special or national histories, but truly universal, in
the philosophic sense of the term; treating solely of those subjects
common to all mankind, or which illustrate the general march of
humanity. Hence all other historical views, dictated by a predilection
for one's own country--inquiries into the political institutions of
one, or several, or all existing states--a review of the circle of
mercantile operations, and their gradual extension, and of the
progress of the mechanical arts--and lastly, curious and erudite
dissertations on literature, philology and the fine arts (however
interesting, instructive, and in many respects useful, such special
dissertations may be in themselves)--all these must be either entirely
excluded from general history, or must at least occupy a place very
subordinate to, and are deserving of notice only as far as they
illustrate, what must ever constitute the main subject of the
Philosophy of History. In the first ages of the world, it is often
difficult to obtain satisfactory information, and a competent degree
of certainty on the subjects which are alone, or at least chiefly,
worthy of attention. But in modern times, it is a far more arduous
task to select out of the immense multitude and variety of facts
susceptible of historical proof, those which are of a general interest
for mankind, and amid the crowd of details steadily to preserve the
general outline of history.
It would be a great error to refer to the Christian constitution of
the state and of science, every remarkable or important incident in
the history of government and of science, merely because such
incidents have occurred in the middle age, or among Christian nations
of later times. We must strive to form a loftier idea of the Christian
model both in science and in government, so that the highest and
noblest monuments in either, should from human infirmity be considered
but faint approximations, I do not say, to the unattainable standard
of an imaginary perfection, but to the sober reality of Christian
truth. Although it is not possible rigidly to separate public life
from public opinions, on account of the intimate union between both,
and the mutual influence which government and science exercise over
one another; yet as the state is the groundwork for the cultivation of
science, and the former must precede the latter, I shall follow this
historical order, and commence with the constitution of the Christian
state.
As here the question is not as to the _Beau Ideal_ of supreme
perfection, or as to a precise, rigid, and scientific theory of the
Christian state, (for which here at least, if not for the present age,
the time may not have arrived)--but merely as to a general outline of
such a theory--I shall only observe, that the Christian state must
rest on the basis of religious feelings. For without feeling its
relation to religion cannot be conceived--and such a mere relation,
considered in itself, would lose its religious character. But the
government which is founded on Christianity, is on that account
limited, and is consequently in its very nature abhorrent either from
absolute despotism, or the uncontrolled tyranny of popular factions.
In the next place, the government founded on religion, is one in which
sentiment, personal spirit, and personal character are the primary and
ruling elements, and not the dead letter, and the written formula of a
mere artificial constitution. In this last respect one may say, that
the Christian government inclines very strongly towards monarchy; for
in monarchy, it is the sacred person of the king, the character of the
ruler, the spirit of his administration, confidence in his person, and
attachment to the hereditary dynasty, which form the basis, the
animating spirit, and vivifying principle of the social system. In a
republic it is not the person, but the law which governs; nay, the
written word of the law is there of the utmost importance; and thus
the dead letter of the constitution is in a republic almost as
sacred, as in a monarchy the person called and consecrated to the
functions of government by divine right. But more than this we should
not say--namely, that the Christian government, founded as it is on
personality and on sentiment, inclines _on the whole_ strongly
towards the monarchical form--a leaning which is by no means
incompatible with many Republican usages and Republican Institutions
of a subordinate kind. Still less should we exaggerate this idea so
far, as to maintain that the Christian government is entirely and
necessarily monarchical, even in its outward form; and that a Republic
is objectionable at all times and under all circumstances without
distinction. Such absolutism in the doctrines of public law, and in
the theory of government, is very remote from true Christian
principles. The unhistorical government of mere Reason--the
destructive principle of revolution--is indeed totally incompatible
with Christianity; principally because the Christian religion
tolerates and recognizes all legal institutions, such as they are,
without enquiring into their origin; (as the gospel not only left
inviolate, but even respected the legality of the Roman dominion in
the conquered and incorporated countries;) and also because the
Christian notion of right, like the Christian system of government, is
by no means absolute, but is ever qualified by circumstances. A
Republican government, which is founded not so much on the abstract
or rationalist principle of absolute freedom and equality, but on
ancient customs and hereditary rights, on freedom of sentiment and
generosity of character, consequently on personality, is by no means
essentially opposed to the true spirit of monarchy; still less is it
inconsistent with the Christian theory of government. But a despotism,
illegitimate not perhaps in its origin, but in its abuse of power,
strikes at the first principles of the Christian state, whose mild,
temperate, and historical character is as abhorrent from absolutism,
as from the opposite principle of unqualified freedom and universal
equality--the revolutionary principle, which involves the overthrow of
all existing rights.
As in the Christian's estimation, the worth and excellence of an
individual is not to be judged by his outward appearance or by the
observance of certain forms, but by the sincerity of his inward
sentiments; so the same observation will apply to states. It is the
spirit and purpose of an action, the nature of a deed, the personal
conduct displayed in a public measure; and not any outward form, which
proves or determines the good or evil tendency of any important act,
which may be the subject of history. That Christian tone and spirit
which belongs to the government of the illustrious, but not immaculate
Charlemagne, does not proceed from the circumstance, that he, like
Alfred after him, solicited the counsels and co-operation of his
Bishops in framing laws for the various provinces of his empire, (for
many of these laws contained moral injunctions,) or that at Rome the
Pope placed the Imperial crown upon his head. But the Christian spirit
of his government is evinced by that lofty idea which filled up the
whole of his active life--by his conception of the relations of church
and state, and of the utility of science for the civilization of
nations--by his project of an universal empire destined to embrace and
protect all civilized nations--the noble fabric of modern Christendom,
of which he laid the first foundation-stone, and which reveals his
enlarged views, comprehending alike his own age and succeeding times.
But whenever we meet in history with a government which independently
of outward forms, is founded on the love of divine justice--on a
principle of self-devotion whereby rulers are ready to sacrifice their
own interest and even their own existence in the cause of justice and
of social order--these, we may be sure are the certain and indubitable
marks of the realization of the Christian theory of law and
government. On the other hand, wherever we perceive despotism or
violence, or what we feel to be absolute wrong, though they be veiled
under the sanction of spiritual or temporal power, then we may be sure
the whole enterprise is unchristian, as the principle is unchristian.
Of all the different forms of this political disease, of the manifold
kinds of tyranny, whether ecclesiastical or secular, military or
commercial, domestic or municipal, academic or aristocratic, the
despotism of popular licentiousness is the most reprehensible in
principle, and the most destructive in its effects.
With the usages and institutions of the Germanic nations, this
peculiar temper of the Christian religion perfectly harmonized;
incomparably better at least, than with the arbitrary government of
the Roman state, which even after the conversion of Constantine, still
retained in all essential points a Pagan character. In the old German
states, the system of hereditary monarchy mostly prevailed;--but it
was quite alien from absolutism, and was intermixed with many
Republican institutions, laws, and customs. The whole system of those
governments was founded on the historical basis of ancient usages--on
the pure, free and generous sentiment of honour--on personal glory and
personal character and talents. As soon as this natural moral energy
of the Germanic nations had received a religious consecration from
Christianity, and those energetic, heroic souls had imbibed with
fervour, simplicity, and humility, the maxims of the religion of love;
all the elements of a truly Christian government, and Christian system
of policy were then offered to mankind. The political history of those
ancient times has been mostly represented in a too systematic point of
view, for the purpose of favouring some particular object, or
interest, or some favourite opinion of modern times; since historians
employ all their ingenuity in tracing step by step, and disclosing to
our view the first rise and gradual growth of any particular form of
government, or principle of right--such as the establishment of
royalty on the one hand, and that of the constitution of the three
orders on the other. But they remain quite unconcerned about every
more exalted principle in society. To judge and appreciate not
according to the standard of our own or any other age, but according
to the dictates of eternal truth, the manners, the modes of thinking,
the tone of society, the spirit and views which animated men, whatever
was good or evil, christian or anti-christian in their sentiments, is
with these writers a matter of the utmost indifference. If there is
any exception from the truth of this remark, it is when they meet with
some singular trait of manners or character--some historical paradox
calculated to stimulate interest, and which they then never fail to
sever from its general connexion with the age, to tear up from its
natural roots, and exhibit to the curiosity of the beholder. And yet
in such individual traits of character in the middle age, though they
be at first remarked only from their singularity, and be not even
fully understood, more traces of historical life and truth are to be
found, than in those systematic representations of history, drawn up
with some specific political view, and which aim at an elaborate
dissection and violent disrupture of institutions, which in those
early times, were inseparably united in the life of Christian nations.
If the best and most praiseworthy measures adopted in that first
period of Christian polity, for the settlement and further improvement
of the Christian state, and for the establishment and application of
christian maxims and principles of government, were nothing more but a
generous effort, a good intention, a rude design--a feeble, imperfect
approximation towards a divine term--yet we must consider them as
peculiar historical phenomena, leave them in their individual
bearings, and not prematurely force them into any systematic
connexion, or attach them to any fixed or formal principle of right;
for in the Christian government, feeling and personality are the most
essential things.
If I could overstep the narrow limits of this work, confined as it is
to a rapid sketch of the main and essential facts in the historical
progress of mankind, I should prefer to draw a portrait of the mode of
government and prevalent opinions of that age, out of the many
characteristic traits in the lives of its distinguished rulers, its
great and virtuous kings and emperors, knights and heroes:--such as
that Charlemagne, who would rightly open the series, that pious
King Alfred, who in a far more contracted sphere, was equally great,
those first Saxon Kings and Emperors of Germany--princes distinguished
for their religious and virtuous sentiments, their great and upright
character, and whose reigns exhibiting as they do, the paramount
influence of religion on public life, constitute the happiest era, and
the truly golden period of our annals. The peculiar nature and
constitution, the internal spirit and essence of the Christian state,
would be much more clearly and vividly represented by the examples of
these great characters, who to the pure will of their energetic,
heroic souls, united a practical knowledge of life, and a natural
insight into the principles of Christian policy. Such a course I would
prefer to entangling myself in the usual disputes about the respective
relations of the spiritual and temporal powers, and all the
contentious points involved in that matter; or to entering upon any
dissertation respecting the decisive era in the developement of
royalty and its rights, or in the progress of the constitution of the
three estates, and of various municipal corporations; however useful
and instructive such enquiries may be in the special history of
particular countries. And even in the latter respect, those glorious
names form a mighty epoch; and in the history of almost all the great
European countries, we meet with some holy and magnanimous monarch,
who laid the solid foundations of his country's constitution, or
introduced a higher civility and refinement in life and manners. Such
were in Hungary the holy King Stephen, and in France, the great St.
Lewis, who in more unquiet times restored a better spirit, and for a
while retarded the progress of corruption. There were also other
kings, heroes and emperors, like Rodolph of Hapsburgh, who without
being honoured with the title of saints, were truly pious, chivalric
and equitable monarchs, and may be esteemed and revered as the
Christian regenerators of their age, and the founders of a true and
religious system of government and manners. A lively sketch of such
men and rulers, who acted and governed well and greatly according to
Christian principles and views, would, I think, furnish a far more
complete idea of the true nature of the Christian state in this its
first period of developement, than any laboured or artificial
definition. There are along with these individual characters,
individual and transient periods of prosperity, which break out for
one generation or more in the history of those early times; periods
which can only be considered as historical exceptions from the general
order of things. Even those more comprehensive, and so far more
general political institutions, evidently peculiar to those Christian
ages, and nowhere else to be found--like the truce of God, which
repressed within certain limits the hereditary spirit of feud--or the
spiritual chivalry in the orders of the Templars and of the Knights of
St. John, consecrated to warfare in the cause of God, and opening as
they did, in the time of the crusades, to the same spirit of
chivalrous feud a higher path and a more noble career--all these
political institutions, I say, springing out of the nature and
exigencies of their age, can be understood only by a reference to the
circumstances and prevailing spirit of the times, and must therefore
be judged as historical peculiarities. As they often sprang up
suddenly without a visible or apparent cause, and as if by some high
mysterious impulse, so they often sank again as rapidly; and the pure
spirit--the true import of such institutions appeared but for a
moment, like a silvery gleam; then they degenerated, or were
transformed into something totally different. And we must not be
astonished at this, since what is best and noblest in man--feeling and
its divine quality, is most easily and rapidly impaired, and may
sometimes indeed preserve an external vigour, when it has undergone an
internal change, and assumed a direction opposed to God and all
goodness. There were also particular rulers possessed of an energetic
will and a comprehensive understanding, who exercised a wide and
commanding, but pernicious influence on their age, and the world; and
among these, the most noted were Barbarossa and that secret friend of
the Saracens, the emperor Frederick the Second; princes who with some
others, must be regarded as the first authors of the great dissension.
After this dissension had broken out in the fearful struggle of the
Guelphs and Ghibellines, and Christendom was divided into two parties;
discord became general, pursued its resistless course, and acting in
those distracted times like some new destroying law of nature,
absorbed all personality and its influence in the general abyss of
error, or made it at least less conspicuous.
I will now endeavour to give a short sketch of the general progress of
European society in this its first period of developement, and to
point out the then peculiar nature and constitution of the
Christian state;--from that epoch when Charlemagne laid the first
solid foundation for a permanent system of christian government and
christian manners, down to the moment when an anti-christian spirit of
discord broke out with incurable violence, and became universally
predominant. I will at the same time endeavour to take an historical
survey of the whole Christian West, as it has remained the theatre of
the subsequent progress of society, and of the great transactions of
the world down to our times.