Chapter II. The Power of Ideas

CHAPTER II The Power of Ideas In historical perspective, the Phoenicians are unique; for though they had a tremendous and active part in the events of their time, it was that of antagonist. On the instant of their disappearance, they faded into unreality, leaving no residue. We do not feel that they bequeathed us anything substantial, to become incorporate with our bones, woven into the texture of our lives. This is the more paradoxical, since our inheritance from Greece and Rome consists of abstractions ; while the Phoenicians were practical, and did succeed with a kind of international organization. Above all, they touched the points where our vital ideas originated. Their activity stimulated Greece to inquiry and forced Rome to expand; they erected the Temple at Jerusalem and took in pledge the humble villages of Galilee. They were carriers and catalysts. Yet we seem to start de novo with Greece and Rome.

In reason, this cannot be true; but the illusion must have a reason. It is that the Phoenicians were intrinsically a physical phenomenon. They effected a hook-up of an energy circuit which their political mechanism could not accommodate. In human affairs all that endures is what men think. Humanity as such is an intellectual concept. As a nation, the Phoenicians disintegrated from the impact of a new idea. But three new ideas were already nascent, which were to form the structure of Europe; and later, in re-combination, to create the New World. These complementary ideas need to be recalled. The fame of Greece is usually identified with art and letters; but the lasting influence of Greece derives from neither. Greek architecture is of the simplest design, in15 16 THE GOD OF THE MACHINE organic as a crystal, distinguished by exquisite proportion and refined ornament but indicating no further development.

Greek sculpture fixed in immutable perfection a chosen type. The art of Greece was self-contained and static. It escapes limitation by the timeless quality of a moment of beauty saved and set apart in defiance of the eternal flux. In their social system the Greeks were likewise at a dead end. Their divinities enjoined no moral order, representing rather the indifferent caprice of nature toward man. Moreover, the gods had grown remote j for educated men faith was thinned to poetic fancy. As a consequence, the Greeks tended to regard the universe as pure phenomena. Greek domestic manners did not make the home a center of strong emotional attachment. Mental companionship was sought elsewhere j normal restraints were loosened to an unprecedented degree. The Greek political method was of a correspondent type, as might be expected when logic has superseded tradition and yet found no principle. Democracy is pure process, consisting of a series of pragmatical expedients, arrived at by majority vote, the verdict of numbers. It has only chance sequence, and no continuity except in the persons concerned. It actually works on the strength of custom, and is therefore inoperable except with a small community of a fairly homogeneous culture. Yet by the Greek habit of thought, free inquiry, custom was already discredited. Democracy inevitably lapses into tyranny j but while in flux it may temporarily leave a wide margin of conduct and thought unregulated. This is not presumed to be of right; it occurs because the power of the whole (the people) is theoretically a plenary power undifferentiated in its parts or agencies.

What is everybody's business is nobody's business. The full power can be exercised only in a closed economy, such as obtained in Sparta, where indeed it left no margin whatever. The Athenians, being open to commerce, for a time took license to think. Trade and travel enabled them to make comparative observations; they were eager to hear new THE POWER OF IDEAS 17 things. The idea they evolved, taken by itself, was a solvent of such institutions as they possessed 5 it aggravated the peril in which they stood by further attenuating the social fabric. Yet they formulated it courageously; and it was their contribution to the future. Pytheas embodied it. The Greeks had the idea of science. Savages acquire information without making categories by the attributes or qualities of things. More advanced societies still established on tradition cherish separate branches of knowledge which are largely regarded as given; hence further investigation is apt to be forbidden as impious. The Greeks had their premonitory fables of Prometheus and Icarus. Nevertheless, they perceived that all knowledge might be interconnected and capable of indefinite enlargement by rational inquiry. They examined the processes of the intellect, sharpened and tested their minds, to concentrate upon generalizations and search for axioms. Inconsistently, they expressed contempt for practical application. Science, they said, should be pursued for the intellectual pleasure of knowing the truth. This singular attitude arose from political conditions. The application of science to production requires assured possession of private property, free labor, and time enough to return benefits for the effort and capital expended. With the Greeks, the hopeless instability of democracy allowed no security of the individual against the mass nor of the nation against external attack. But as long as a man's ideas remain purely speculative, and the usufruct confined to intellectual pleasure, he cannot be deprived of them while he lives, and he will leave it at that. A man can think and work effectively only for himself.

Yet this extraordinary denial may have had some use in the circumstances, by stressing intrinsic value in thought. And it is true that when men have become engrossed in practical devices they are apt to narrow their field of vision and lose sight of the interconnection of the various branches of knowledge. More than that, as is now the case, they will even 18 THE GOD OF THE MACHINE forget the larger principles they have applied, and on which their well-being depends. But the implication which the Greeks put aside was ultimately inescapable. Science is the rule of reason. Instead of being resigned to inexorable destiny or blind chance, it might be possible, by discerning the causation of events, to order them at will, and bring about what men desire. An abstraction will move a mountain; nothing can withstand an idea. The Greeks had found the lever. Apparently events mocked them. While they philosophized, the mountain moved of itself in an avalanche; Rome overpowered them. On the face of it, this would seem a victory of gross substance, a refutation of the concealed premise of the superiority of mind over matter. It was not; on the contrary, even in its immediate incidence it was a vindication of the intellect. Rome had evolved an abstraction, a political concept, which was likewise among the universals. Rome had the idea of law.

All nations have had laws; the most primitive savages were bound by custom, and a binding custom is a law. A taboo is a petrified law. Primitive peoples believe that their laws are permanent even though arbitrary, like "the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not." The effective meaning is that custom may alter only by imperceptible degrees, if it is to remain valid. Custom cannot be new. The attendant drawback is that if a ruling custom is broken abruptly, no substitute is at once available. What may happen, by war, pestilence, or migration, or even by innovations otherwise beneficial, is a period of confusion, in which habit is interrupted and expedients tried; but the resultant institutions cannot endure unless they are imbued with traditional sentiments. Of course the fabric of tradition is never wholly destroyed. However, since custom cannot meet change quickly, and above an elementary level of culture there will be occasional necessity for deciding a course of action which must affect the group, an informal council and a leader comTHE POWER OF IDEAS 19 prise the obvious development. These seem to suffice for a nomad band of hunters. The next stage, either the pastoral nomad, or primitive agriculture, calls for more definite organization of a permanent character 3 to secure continuity, the chief's position was allowed to become more or less hereditary, with the patriarchal clan system. The clan was a permanent family $ many languages still testify to this concept. If a distinction is to be drawn between a chief and a king, by modern usage it would consist in the degree of formal organization, marked by the appointment or recognition of officials with fixed rank and specified duties. The simultaneous evolution, alongside of secular government, of a priesthood with moral authority, is to be observed. It had its own significance. "Division of powers," or opposed agencies of moral authority and physical power, is a natural feature of society -y hence it is also necessary in the form of government to secure stability.

But all of these forms of association were effective only in appropriate conditions, and had their innate defects. Custom could not deal with the unexpected. Leadership will not serve with organized institutions. Monarchy becomes despotic. Each tyfe of association is suitable to a certain mode of conversion of energyy and will either break down or become fused into rigidity when it is made to receive a higher potential than it can accommodate. When a nation has experienced the conditions in which custom is proved perishable, leadership disastrous, and monarchy oppressive, reason must define the prime source of authority, to invest it with viable form. By such a sequence, probably foreshortened, Rome became a political laboratory. What went into the crucible must be deduced from the myths, legends, traditions, and institutions which took shape in the obscure centuries of the city's early history. It does not appear that Rome was ever primitively barbaric, if the city had its inception in trade, using 20 THE GOD OF THE MACHINE money,* and holding land as private property; these are elements of an advanced civilization. And the fables are frequently inconsistent, as would be the case if they were partly imported and intermingled. Such tales as those of Romulus and Remus and the rape of the Sabine women cannot be accepted literally; nor need they be of local origin. Bride stealing belongs to a barbaric culture, in which it is no dishonor. The belief that the she-wolf suckled Rome must be still older, and might be derived from a savage totem; but not necessarily, for when Europe was barbarian, an outlaw was a "wolf's-head," a very ancient figure of speech. The suggestion in all three stories is that Rome was always more or less an open city, admitting refugees, exiles, or immigrants.

They would bring in varied customs which must be reconciled under general rules. In any event, the feature of asylum certainly became incorporated in the Roman social and legal system; and ultimately created the special character of Roman citizenship. Distinctively, one had to be born a Greek, but one could become a Roman. Again, a memorial of past trouble in finding the workable mode of association of a high type may be suspected in one institution peculiar to Rome, and most extraordinary in a civilized people, because it lay entirely outside the social order. Nobody knew any more what it was for, in the sense that everyone knew what the Vestal Virgins signified. The office had served its purpose so completely that the purpose had been forgotten. Though famed for their military courage, the Romans did not practice dueling, nor countenance informal private vengeance. Yet there was one man, who * Familiarity with the function of money enabled Rome to govern an empire in due course. It is said that the Spartans, being unaccustomed to money, were quickly demoralized when they abandoned their bare subsistence economy.

They could not maintain the minimum of honesty in contractual relations, having been bred to communism. At the lowest level, they didn't even understand the limits of graft.

THE POWER OF IDEAS 21 must be a criminal, dedicated to a position which had to be gained and held by murder. The man was the Priest of Nemi, "beneath Aricia's trees." Those trees in whose dim shadow The ghastly priest doth reign, The priest who slew the slayer, And shall himself be slain. The incumbent of this sanguinary office obtained it by killing the previous occupant. He might never leave the shelter of the sacred grove, and he was always liable to attack by any other outlaw who could reach that sanctuary of death. The Priest of the Golden Bough has been explained by scholarly references to rites of sacrifice, the scapegoat who bears the sins of the people, or the king-god who died and was restored, like the sun, to ensure fertility of fields and folk. These magic rituals may have sanctioned the priesthood of Nemi. But the Romans were solidly matter-of-fact even in their superstitions. Their deities were mostly useful, assigned to definite duties of a practical kind. Now there was one fitting use for the priesthood of Nemi at its origin.

That was to deter attempts at leadership. No more ironically effective measure could be imagined to discourage such ambitions than the assignment of a spot on which aspirants must meet contenders, and where the winner must abide ever after under the same challenge. Let him have what he asked for, and welcome—a resort to force. Obviously only men already under ban would seek the terrible shrine. The meaning of this particular embodied legend is not confined to its immediate use. It reveals an abstract principle. Such are the terms on which man must exist without law. Being already far advanced beyond custom and leadership, and aware of the incompetence of democracy, the Romans were obliged to solve the problem of government in rational terms, working with what they had. They had 22 THE GOD OF THE MACHINE the family as the social unit, offset by contract law in respect of property, which made the individual the political unit.

Thus the family could not resolve into the true feudal form. They had clans (gentes), of ancient local stock, which could be recognized as an aristocracy, though not in feudal hierarchic order. They had a large miscellaneous population, the plebeians, which just means plenty, the massesj but not necessarily all poor people. The most important element was the tribes, that is, divisions of the city in specific areas, supposed to have remained from the previous union of three different communities. These divisions were strictly territorial and political, with fixed boundaries j persons were comprised in them by residence, not by descent. These tribes had equal representation by franchise resting on landed property, households j and they were required to supply equal contributions for military defense. The representation attached to the area. Subsequent changes, additional areas or redivisions or subdivisions for political purposes, retained this form; they had regional boundaries and representation.

Rome was never an undijferentiated "whole" a simple aggregation of particles, as the theory of democracy postulates. From the beginning, the city of Rome was a federation, with the federal form, which comprises permanent bases and structure, the elements of architecture. Both elements and form called for an elective system; and the Romans first tried life tenure for an elected executive. It was thoroughly unsatisfactory, because there can be no dependable control or limitation of executive powers in such case.* Having got rid of their life presidents (kings), the Romans took rigorous precautions against a return by usurpation. They would have no single chief executive; and even in lesser positions, they inclined to duality in office, which worked very well on the whole. Political offices were •Hereditary constitutional monarchy is possible only as developing out of true feudalism. The necessary check is found in the survival of a landed aristocracy with entail. When that vanishes, the monarchy must founder shortly.

THE POWER OF IDEAS 23 also restricted to fixed and short tenure, with rotation in office and intervals in which an office-seeker was not eligible for re-election. The latter provision is sound, for the sole object of setting a term to office is to get the incumbent out. The main object of voting in any case is to vote against persons or measures. The Romans also watched their generals with unrelaxing jealousy, forbidding even a victorious commander to re-enter the city without formal permission. They were determined to prevent military seizure of civil authority. And they succeeded amazingly, considering their position, which necessitated a good deal of fighting in defense, and constant military readiness. No other ancient nation maintained the same civil control of the army for hundreds of years. Political offices were mainly vested in the aristocracy, and were partly elective, partly appointive or filled by cooptation; the different methods, with life tenure only for Senators, prevented excessive rigidity while preserving continuity. It was also possible for men of exceptional talent to rise from the lower ranks. Nothing was absolutely petrified into status. The equality of Senators (as distinguished from a hierarchical aristocracy), and the election of other officials, not only permitted but required public debate in the governing body and free expression of opinion by the citizens. As both voters and officeholders in the Republic were propertyholders, they had a solid interest in keeping the nation a going concern, with a concomitant obligation in defense.

But the unique stroke of political genius was that the Roman state made provision not only for delay but for positive deadlock. The power of the plebs, through their tribunes, was flat obstruction. The tribunes of the plebeians could not initiate any measure, but they could stop the works; and their persons were sacred. Nothing is more essential to the welfare of a nation than the countercheck on government, by legitimate means. A mechanism without a brake, a motor without a cut-off, is built for self-destruction.

24 THE GOD OF THE MACHINE The Roman system was durable because it was so framed that stresses became strength, and control was ensured by separating the function of the executive agency and the cutoff. This achievement became possible by defining the source of authority. "The Romans possessed from very early times the conception of jus, which is wider than that of positive law laid down by authority, and denotes an order morally binding on the members of the community, both human and divine." * This idea of law, as an abstract concept, is not predicated by custom, leadership, council or king; nor is it compatible with democracy. With all these authority is arbitrary, being either given in the particular custom, or lodged in persons by precedence (parenthood or seniority), or assigned to number. The Romans affirmed a moral order in the universe. •CAMBRIDGE ANCIENT HISTORY: The Primitive Institutions of Rome.

H. Stuart Jackson. Macmillan.