that　decay　and　that　growth　a　bond　of　cause　and　effect　where　there　is
  really　none。　　The　general　decay　may　have　determined　the　course　of
  many　men's　thoughts；　but　it　no　more　set　them　thinking　than　（as　I
  have　heard　said）　the　decay　of　the　Ancien　Regime　produced　the　new
  Regimea　loose　metaphor；　which；　like　all　metaphors；　will　not　hold
  water；　and　must　not　be　taken　for　a　philosophic　truth。　　That　would　be
  to　confess　manwhat　I　shall　never　confess　him　to　bethe　creature
  of　circumstances；　it　would　be　to　fall　into　the　same　fallacy　of
  spontaneous　generation　as　did　the　ancients；　when　they　believed　that
  bees　were　bred　from　the　carcass　of　a　dead　ox。　　In　the　first　place；
  the　bees　were　no　bees；　but　fliesunless　when　some　true　swarm　of
  honey　bees　may　have　taken　up　their　abode　within　the　empty　ribs；　as
  Samson's　bees　did　in　that　of　the　lion。　　But　bees　or　flies；　each
  sprang　from　an　egg；　independent　of　the　carcass；　having　a　vitality　of
  its　own：　　it　was　fostered　by　the　carcass　it　fed　on　during
  development；　but　bred　from　it　it　was　not；　any　more　than　Marat　was
  bred　from　the　decay　of　the　Ancien　Regime。　　There　are　flies　which；　by
  feeding　on　putridity；　become　poisonous　themselves；　as　did　Marat：
  but　even　they　owe　their　vitality　and　organisation　to　something
  higher　than　that　on　which　they　feed；　and　each　of　them；　however；
  defaced　and　debased；　was　at　first　a　〃thought　of　God。〃　　All　true
  manhood　consists　in　the　defiance　of　circumstances；　and　if　any　man　be
  the　creature　of　circumstances；　it　is　because　he　has　become　so；　like
  the　drunkard；　because　he　has　ceased　to　be　a　man；　and　sunk　downward
  toward　the　brute。
  Accordingly　we　shall　find；　throughout　the　18th　century；　a　stirring
  of　thought；　an　originality；　a　resistance　to　circumstances；　an
  indignant　defiance　of　circumstances；　which　would　have　been
  impossible；　had　circumstances　been　the　true　lords　and　shapers　of
  mankind。　　Had　that　latter　been　the　case；　the　downward　progress　of
  the　Ancien　Regime　would　have　been　irremediable。　　Each　generation；
  conformed　more　and　more　to　the　element　in　which　it　lived；　would　have
  sunk　deeper　in　dull　acquiescence　to　evil；　in　ignorance　of　all
  cravings　save　those　of　the　senses；　and　if　at　any　time　intolerable
  wrong　or　want　had　driven　it　to　revolt；　it　would　have　issued；　not　in
  the　proclamation　of　new　and　vast　ideas；　but　in　an　anarchic　struggle
  for　revenge　and　bread。
  There　are　races；　alas！　which　seem；　for　the　present　at　least；
  mastered　by　circumstances。　　Some；　like　the　Chinese；　have　sunk　back
  into　that　state；　some；　like　the　negro　in　Africa；　seem　not　yet　to
  have　emerged　from　it；　but　in　Europe；　during　the　eighteenth　century；
  were　working　not　merely　new　forces　and　vitalities　（abstractions
  which　mislead　rather　than　explain）；　but　living　persons　in　plenty；
  men　and　women；　with　independent　and　original　hearts　and　brains；
  instinct；　in　spite　of　all　circumstances；　with　power　which　we　shall
  most　wisely　ascribe　directly　to　Him　who　is　the　Lord　and　Giver　of
  Life。
  Such　persons　seemedI　only　say　seemedmost　numerous　in　England　and
  in　Germany。　　But　there　were　enough　of　them　in　France　to　change　the
  destiny　of　that　great　nation　for　awhileperhaps　for　ever。
  M。　de　Tocqueville　has　a　whole　chapter；　and　a　very　remarkable　one；
  which　appears　at　first　sight　to　militate　against　my　beliefa
  chapter　〃showing　that　France　was　the　country　in　which　men　had　become
  most　alike。〃
  〃The　men；〃　he　says；　〃of　that　time；　especially　those　belonging　to　the
  upper　and　middle　ranks　of　society；　who　alone　were　at　all
  conspicuous；　were　all　exactly　alike。〃
  And　it　must　be　allowed；　that　if　this　were　true　of　the　upper　and
  middle　classes；　it　must　have　been　still　more　true　of　the　mass　of　the
  lowest　population；　who；　being　most　animal；　are　always　most　moulded
  or　rather　crushedby　their　own　circumstances；　by　public　opinion；
  and　by　the　wants　of　five　senses；　common　to　all　alike。
  But　when　M。　de　Tocqueville　attributes　this　curious　fact　to　the
  circumstances　of　their　political　stateto　that　〃government　of　one
  man　which　in　the　end　has　the　inevitable　effect　of　rendering　all　men
  alike；　and　all　mutually　indifferent　to　their　common　fate〃we　must
  differ；　even　from　him：　　for　facts　prove　the　impotence　of　that；　or　of
  any　other　circumstance；　in　altering　the　hearts　and　souls　of　men；　in
  producing　in　them　anything　but　a　mere　superficial　and　temporary
  resemblance。
  For　all　the　while　there　was；　among　these　very　French；　here　and　there
  a　variety　of　character　and　purpose；　sufficient　to　burst　through　that
  very　despotism；　and　to　develop　the　nation　into　manifold；　new；　and
  quite　original　shapes。　　Thus　it　was　proved　that　the　uniformity　had
  been　only　in　their　outside　crust　and　shell。　　What　tore　the　nation　to
  pieces　during　the　Reign　of　Terror；　but　the　boundless　variety　and
  originality　of　the　characters　which　found　themselves　suddenly　in
  free　rivalry？　　What　else　gave　to　the　undisciplined　levies；　the
  bankrupt　governments；　the　parvenu　heroes　of　the　Republic；　a　manifold
  force；　a　self…dependent　audacity；　which　made　them　the　conquerors；
  and　the　teachers　（for　good　and　evil）　of　the　civilised　world？　　If
  there　was　one　doctrine　which　the　French　Revolution　specially
  proclaimedwhich　it　caricatured　till　it　brought　it　into　temporary
  disreputeit　was　this：　　that　no　man　is　like　another；　that　in　each
  is　a　God…given　〃individuality；〃　an　independent　soul；　which　no
  government　or　man　has　a　right　to　crush；　or　can　crush　in　the　long
  run：　　but　which　ought　to　have；　and　must　have；　a　〃carriere　ouverte
  aux　talents；〃　freely　to　do　the　best　for　itself　in　the　battle　of
  life。　　The　French　Revolution；　more　than　any　event　since　twelve　poor
  men　set　forth　to　convert　the　world　some　eighteen　hundred　years　ago；
  proves　that　man　ought　not　to　be；　and　need　not　be；　the　creature　of
  circumstances；　the　puppet　of　institutions；　but；　if　he　will；　their
  conqueror　and　their　lord。
  Of　these　original　spirits　who　helped　to　bring　life　out　of　death；　and
  the　modern　world　out　of　the　decay　of　the　mediaeval　world；　the　French
  PHILOSOPHES　and　encyclopaedists　are；　of　course；　the　most　notorious。
  They　confessed；　for　the　most　part；　that　their　original　inspiration
  had　come　from　England。　　They　were；　or　considered　themselves；　the
  disciples　of　Locke；　whose　philosophy；　it　seems　to　me；　their　own　acts
  disproved。
  And　first；　a　few　words　on　these　same　philosophes。　　One　may　be
  thoroughly　aware　of　their　deficiencies；　of　their　sins；　moral　as　well
  as　intellectual；　and　yet　one　may　demand　that　everyone　should　judge
  them　fairlywhich　can　only　be　done　by　putting　himself　in　their
  place；　and　any　fair　judgment　of　them　will；　I　think；　lead　to　the
  conclusion　that　they　were　not　mere　destroyers；　inflamed　with　hate　of
  everything　which　mankind　had　as　yet　held　sacred。　　Whatever　sacred
  things　they　despised；　one　sacred　thing　they　reverenced；　which　men
  had　forgotten　more　and　more　since　the　seventeenth　centurycommon
  justice　and　common　humanity。　　It　was　this；　I　believe；　which　gave
  them　their　moral　force。　　It　was　this　which　drew　towards　them　the
  hearts；　not　merely　of　educated　bourgeois　and　nobles　（on　the　menu
  peuple　they　had　no　influence；　and　did　not　care　to　have　any）；　but　of
  every　continental　sovereign　who　felt　in　himself　higher　aspirations
  than　those　of　a　mere　selfish　tyrantFrederick　the　Great；　Christina
  of　Sweden；　Joseph　of　Austria；　and　even　that　fallen　Juno；　Catharine
  of　Russia；　with　all　her　sins。　　To　take　the　most　extreme　instance
  Voltaire。　　We　may　question　his　being　a　philosopher　at　all。　　We　may
  deny　that　he　had　even　a　tincture　of　formal　philosophy。　　We　may　doubt
  much　whether　he　had　any　of　that　human　and　humorous　common　sense；
  which　is　often　a　good　substitute　for　the　philosophy　of　the　schools。
  We　may　feel　against　him　a　just　and　honest　indignation　when　we
  remember　that　he　dared　to　travestie　into　a　foul　satire　the　tale　of
  his　country's　purest　and　noblest　heroine；　but　we　must　recollect；　at
  the　same　time；　that　he　did　a　public　service　to　the　morality　of　his
  own　country；　and　of　all　Europe；　by　his　indignationquite　as　just
  and　honest　as　any　which　we　may　feelat　the　legal　murder　of　Calas。
  We　must　recollect　that；　if　he　exposes　baseness　and　foulness　with　too
  cynical　a　license　of　speech　（in　which；　indeed；　he　sinned　no　more
  than　had　the　average　of　French　writers　since　the　days　of　Montaigne）；
  he　at　least　never　advocates　them；　as　did　Le　Sage。　　We　must　recollect
  that；　scattered　throughout　his　writings；　are　words　in　favour　of　that
  which　is　just；　merciful；　magnanimous；　and　even；　at　times；　in　favour
  of　that　which　is　pure；　which　proves　that　in　Voltaire；　as　in　most
  men；　there　was　a　double　selfthe　one　sickened　to　cynicism　by　the
  iniquity　and　folly　which　he　saw　around　himthe　other；　hungering
  after　a　nobler　life；　and　possibly　exciting　that　hunger　in　one　and
  another；　here　and　there；　who　admired　him　for　other　reasons　than　the
  educated　mob；　which　cried　after　him　〃Vive　la　Pucelle。〃
  Rousseau；　too。　　Easy　it　is　to　feel　disgust；　contempt；　for　the
  〃Confessions〃　and　the　〃Nouvelle　Heloise〃for