MENTAL ANARCHY AT THE TIME OF THE REVOLUTION AND THE INFLUENCEATTRIBUTED TO THE PHILOSOPHERS
1.Origin and Propagation of Revolutionary Ideas.
The outward life of men in every age is moulded upon an inward life consisting of a framework of traditions, sentiments, and moral influences which direct their conduct and maintain certain fundamental notions which they accept without discussion.
Let the resistance of this social framework weaken, and ideas which could have had no force before will germinate and develop.
Certain theories whose success was enormous at the time of the Revolution would have encountered an impregnable wall two centuries earlier.
The aim of these considerations is to recall to the reader the fact that the outward events of revolutions are always a consequence of invisible transformations which have slowly gone forward in men's minds.Any profound study of a revolution necessitates a study of the mental soil upon which the ideas that direct its course have to germinate.
Generally slow in the extreme, the evolution of ideas is often invisible for a whole generation.Its extent can only be grasped by comparing the mental condition of the same social classes at the two extremities of the curve which the mind has followed.To realise the different conceptions of royalty entertained by educated men under Louis XIV.and Louis XVI., we must compare the political theories of Bossuet and Turgot.
Bossuet expressed the general conceptions of his time concerning the absolute monarchy when he based the authority of a Government upon the will of God, ``sole judge of the actions of kings, always irresponsible before men.'' Religious faith was then as strong as the monarchical faith from which it seemed inseparable, and no philosopher could have shaken it.
The writings of the reforming ministers of Louis XVI., those of Turgot, for instance, are animated by quite another spirit.Of the Divine right of kings there is hardly a word, and the rights of the peoples begin to be clearly defined.
Many events had contributed to prepare for such an evolution--unfortunate wars, famines, imposts, general poverty at the end of the reign of Louis XV., &c.Slowly destroyed, respect for monarchical authority was replaced by a mental revolt which was ready to manifest itself as soon as occasion should arise.
When once the mental framework commences to crumble the end comes rapidly.This is why at the time of the Revolution ideas were so quickly propagated which were by no means new, but which until then had exerted no influence, as they had not fallen on fruitful ground.
Yet the ideas which were then so attractive and effectual had often been expressed.For a long time they had inspired the politics of England.Two thousand years earlier the Greek and Latin authors had written in defence of liberty, had cursed tyrants, and proclaimed the rights of popular sovereignty.
The middle classes who effected the Revolution, although, like their fathers, they had learned all these things in text-books, were not in any degree moved by them, because the moment when such ideas could move them had not arrived.How should the people have been impressed by them at a time when all men were accustomed to regard all hierarchies as natural necessities?
The actual influence of the philosophers in the genesis of the Revolution was not that which was attributed to them.They revealed nothing new, but they developed the critical spirit which no dogma can resist once the way is prepared for its downfall.
Under the influence of this developing critical spirit things which were no longer very greatly respected came to be respected less and less.When tradition and prestige had disappeared the social edifice suddenly fell.
This progressive disaggregation finally descended to the people, but was not commenced by the people.The people follows examples, but never sets them.
The philosophers, who could not have exerted any influence over the people, did exert a great influence over the enlightened portion of the nation.The unemployed nobility, who had long been ousted from their old functions, and who were consequently inclined to be censorious, followed their leadership.Incapable of foresight, the nobles were the first to break with the traditions that were their only raison d'etre.As steeped in humanitarianism and rationalism as the bourgeoisie of to-day, they continually sapped their own privileges by their criticisms.As to-day, the most ardent reformers were found among the favourites of fortune.The aristocracy encouraged dissertations on the social contract, the rights of man, and the equality of citizens.At the theatre it applauded plays which criticised privileges, the arbitrariness and the incapacity of men in high places, and abuses of all kinds.
As soon as men lose confidence in the foundations of the mental framework which guides their conduct they feel at first uneasy and then discontented.All classes felt their old motives of action gradually disappearing.Things that had seemed sacred for centuries were now sacred no longer.
The censorious spirit of the nobility and of the writers of the day would not have sufficed to move the heavy load of tradition, but that its action was added to that of other powerful influences.We have already stated, in citing Bossuet, that under the ancien regime the religious and civil governments, widely separated in our days, were intimately connected.To injure one was inevitably to injure the other.Now, even before the monarchical idea was shaken the force of religious tradition was greatly diminished among cultivated men.The constant progress of knowledge had sent an increasing number of minds from theology to science by opposing the truth observed to the truth revealed.
