This mental evolution, although as yet very vague, was sufficient to show that the traditions which for so many centuries had guided men had not the value which had been attributed to them, and that it would soon be necessary to replace them.
But where discover the new elements which might; take the place of tradition? Where seek the magic ring which would raise a new social edifice on the remains of that which no longer contented men?
Men were agreed in attributing to reason the power that tradition and the gods seemed to have lost.How could its force be doubted? Its discoveries having been innumerable, was it not legitimate to suppose that by applying it to the construction of societies it would entirely transform them? Its possible function increased very rapidly in the thoughts of the more enlightened, in proportion as tradition seemed more and more to be distrusted.
The sovereign power attributed to reason must be regarded as the culminating idea which not only engendered the Revolution but governed it throughout.During the whole Revolution men gave themselves up to the most persevering efforts to break with the past, and to erect society upon a new plan dictated by logic.
Slowly filtering downward, the rationalistic theories of the philosophers meant to the people simply that all the things which had been regarded as worthy of respect were now no longer worthy.
Men being declared equal, the old masters need no longer be obeyed.
The multitude easily succeeded in ceasing to respect what the upper classes themselves no longer respected.When the barrier of respect was down the Revolution was accomplished.
The first result of this new mentality was a general insubordination.Mme.Vigee Lebrun relates that on the promenade at Longchamps men of the people leaped on the footboards of the carriages, saying, ``Next year you will be behind and we shall be inside.''
The populace was not alone in manifesting insubordination and discontent.These sentiments were general on the eve of the Revolution.``The lesser clergy,'' says Taine, ``are hostile to the prelates; the provincial gentry to the nobility of the court;the vassals to the seigneurs; the peasants to the townsmen,'' &c.
This state of mind, which had been communicated from the nobles and clergy to the people, also invaded the army.At the moment the States General were opened Necker said: ``We are not sure of the troops.'' The officers were becoming humanitarian and philosophical.The soldiers, recruited from the lowest class of the population, did not philosophise, but they no longer obeyed.
In their feeble minds the ideas of equality meant simply the suppression of all leaders and masters, and therefore of all obedience.In 1790 more than twenty regiments threatened their officers, and sometimes, as at Nancy, threw them into prison.
The mental anarchy which, after spreading through all the classes of society, finally invaded the army was the principal cause of the disappearance of the ancien regime.``It was the defection of the army affected by the ideas of the Third Estate,'' wrote Rivarol, ``that destroyed royalty.''
2.The supposed Influence of the Philosophers of the Eighteenth Century upon the Genesis of the Revolution--Their dislike of Democracy.
Although the philosophers who have been supposed the inspirers of the French Revolution did attack certain privileges and abuses, we must not for that reason regard them as partisans of popular government.Democracy, whose role in Greek history was familiar to them, was generally highly antipathetic to them.
They were not ignorant of the destruction and violence which are its invariable accompaniments, and knew that in the time of Aristotle it was already defined as ``a State in which everything, even the law, depends on the multitude set up as a tyrant and governed by a few declamatory speakers.''
Pierre Bayle, the true forerunner of Voltaire, recalled in the following terms the consequences of popular government in Athens:--``If one considers this history, which displays at great length the tumult of the assemblies, the factions dividing the city, the seditious disturbing it, the most illustrious subjects persecuted, exiled, and punished by death at the will of a violent windbag, one would conclude that this people, which so prided itself on its liberty, was really the slave of a small number of caballers, whom they called demagogues, and who made it turn now in this direction, now in that, as their passions changed, almost as the sea heaps the waves now one way, now another, according to the winds which trouble it.You will seek in vain in Macedonia, which was a monarchy, for as many examples of tyranny as Athenian history will afford.''
Montesquieu had no greater admiration for the democracy.Having described the three forms of government--republican, monarchical, and despotic--he shows very clearly what popular government may lead to:--``Men were free with laws; men would fain be free without them; what was a maxim is called severity; what was order is called hindrance.Formerly the welfare of individuals constituted the public wealth, but now the public wealth becomes the patrimony of individuals.The republic is spoil, and its strength is merely the power of a few citizens and the licence of all.''
