The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Advertisement to the Reader.
• To the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, Sherifs, and Common Council of London.
• The Preface.
• The Life of James Harrington.
• The Mechanics of Nature:
• The Grounds and Reasons of Monarchy Considered: and Exemplify’d In the Scotish Line, Out of Their Own Best Authors and Records.
• The Commonwealth of Oceana. to His Highness the Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland.
• The Introduction, Or Order of the Work.
• Oceana.
• The Preliminarys, Shewing the Principles of Government.
• The Second Part of the Preliminarys.
• The Council of Legislators.
• Oceana: the Model of the Commonwealth of Oceana.
• Anno Dom.
• Anno Domini.
• Anno Domini.
• Epitome of the Whole Commonwealth.
• Libertas. the Proclamation of His Highness the Lord Archon of Oceana Upon Promulgation of the Model.
• The Prerogative of Popular Government.
• Epistle to the Reader.
• The First Book, Containing: a Full Answer to All Such Objections As Have Hitherto Bin Made Against Oceana.
• The Preface.
• Chap. I. Antient and Modern Prudence.
• Chap. I.: Whether Prudence Be Well Distinguish’d Into Antient and Modern.
• Chap. II.: Whether a Commonwealth Be Rightly Defin’d to Be a Government of Laws and Not of Men, and a Monarchy to Be the Government of Som Man, Or a Few Men, and Not of Laws?
• Chap. III.: Whether the Balance of Dominion In Land Be the Natural Cause of Empire?
• Chap. IV. Chap. IV.: Whether the Balance of Empire Be Well Divided Into National and Provincial; and Whether These Two, Or Any Nations That Are of Distinct Balance, Coming to Depend Upon One and the Same Head, Such a Mixture Creates a New Balance.
• Chap. V.: Whether There Be Any Common Right Or Interest of Mankind Distinct From the Parts Taken Severally; and How By the Orders of a Commonwealth It May Be Best Distinguish’d From Privat Interest.
• Chap. VI.: Whether the Senatusconsulta, Or Decrees of the Roman Senat, Had the Power of Laws?
• Chap. VII.: Whether the Ten Commandments Were Propos’d By God Or Moses, and Voted By the People of Israel.
• Chap. VIII.: Whether a Commonwealth Coming Up to the Perfection of the Kind, Coms Not Up to the Perfection of Government, and Has No Flaw In It.
• Chap. IX.: Whether Monarchy Coming Up to the Perfection of the Kind, Coms Not Short of the Perfection of Government, and Has Not Som Flaw In It. In Which Is Also Treated of the Balance of France; of the Original of a Landed Clergy; of Arms, and Their Ki
• Chap. X.: Whether a Commonwealth That Was Not First Broken By Her Self, Was Ever Conquer’d By the Arms of Any Monarch?
• Chap. XI.: Whether There Be Not an Agrarian, Or Som Law of Laws of That Nature, to Supply the Defect of It In Every Commonwealth: and Whether the Agrarian, As It Is Stated In Oceana, Be Not Equal and Satisfactory to All Interests.
• Chap. XII.: Whether Courses Or a Rotation Be Necessary to a Well-order’d Commonwealth. In Which Is Contain’d the Courses Or Parembole of Israel Before the Captivity, Together With the Epitome of Athens and Venice.
• The Second Book; Or, a Political Discourse Concerning Ordination: Against Dr. H. Hammond, Dr. L. Seaman, and the Authors They Follow.
• Advertisment to the Reader.
• Order of the Discourse.
• A Political Discourse Concerning Ordination.
• The Introduction, Or First Chapter.
• Chap. II.: That the Citys, Or Most of Them Nam’d In the Perambulation of the Apostles Paul and Barnabas, Were At That Time Under Popular Government. In Which Is Contain’d the Administration of a Roman Province.
• Chap. III.: The Deduction of the Chirotonia From Popular Government, and of the Original Right of Ordination From the Chirotonia. In Which Is Contain’d the Institution of the Sanhedrim Or Senat of Israel By Moses, and That of Rome By Romulus
• Chap. IV.: The Deduction of the Chirothesia From Monarchical Or Aristocratical Government, and of the Second Way of Ordination From the Chirothesia. In Which Is Contain’d the Commonwealth of the Jews As It Stood After the Captivity.
• Chap. V.: Whether the Chirotonia Mention’d In the Fourteenth of the Acts Be Indeed, As Is Pretended By Dr. Mammond, Dr. Seaman, and the Authors They Follow, the Same With the Chirothesia, Or a Far Different Thing. In Which Are Contain’d the
• Advertisement to the Reader, Or Direction to the Answerer.
• An Answer to Three Objections Against Popular Government, That Were Given Me After These Two Books Were Printed.
• The Art of Lawgiving: In Three Books.
• The Order of the Work.
• The First Book.
• The Second Book.
• The Third Book.
• The First Book, Shewing the Foundations and Superstructures of All Kinds of Government.
• The Preface. Considering the Principles Or Nature of Family Government.
• Chap. I.: Considering the Principles Or Balance of National Governments; With the Different Kinds of the Same.
• Chap. II.: Shewing the Variation of the English Balance.
• Chap. III.: Of Fixation of the Balance, Or of Agrarian Laws.
• Chap. IV.: Shewing the Superstructures of Governments.
• The Conclusion: Observing That the Principles of Human Prudence Being Good Without Proof of Scripture, Are Nevertheless Such As Are Provable Out of Scripture.
• The Second Book, Containing the Commonwealths of the Hebrews; Namely, Elohim, Or the Commonwealth of Israel; and Cabala, Or the Commonwealth of the Jews.
• The Preface, Shewing That There Were Commonwealths Before That of Israel.
• Chap. I.: Shewing That Israel Was a Commonwealth.
• Chap. II.: Shewing What Commonwealth Israel Was.
• Chap. III.: Shewing the Anarchy, Or State of the Israelits Under Their Judges.
• Chap. IV.: Shewing the State of the Israelits Under Their Kings, to the Captivity.
• Chap. V.: Shewing the State of the Jews In the Captivity; and After Their Return Out of It; With the Frame of the Jewish Commonwealth.
• Chap. VI.: Shewing How Ordination Was Brought Into the Christian Church, and the Divers Ways of the Same That Were At Divers Times In Use With the Apostles.
• The Conclusion: Shewing That Neither God, Nor Christ, Or the Apostles, Ever Instituted Any Government Ecclesiastical Or Civil Upon Any Other Principles Than Those Only of Human Prudence.
• The Third Book, Containing a Model of Popular Government, Practically Propos’d According to Reason, Confirm’d By the Scripture, and Agreable to the the Present Balance Or State of Property In England.
• The Preface. Containing a Model of Popular Government, Propos’d Notionally.
• Chap. I.: Containing the Civil Part of the Model, Propos’d Practicably.
• Chap. II.: Containing the Religious Part of This Model, Propos’d Practicably.
• Chap. III.: Containing the Military Part of This Model, Propos’d Practicably.
• Chap. IV.: Containing the Provincial Part of This Model, Propos’d Practicably.
• The Conclusion: Shewing How the Model Propos’d May Be Prov’d Or Examin’d; and Giving a Brief Answer to Mr. Wren’s Last Book, Intitl’d, Monarchy Asserted Against Mr. Harrington’s Oceana.
• A Word Concerning a House of Peers.
• Six Political Tracts Written On Several Occasions.
• Valerius and Publicola: Or, the True Form of a Popular Commonwealth Extracted Ex Puris Naturalibus.
• To the Reader.
• To the Parlament of the Commonwealth of England, &c. the Humble Petition, &c.
• The Petitioner to the Reader.
• A System of Politics Delineated In Short and Easy Aphorisms. Publish’d From the Author’s Own Manuscript.
• Chap. I.: Of Government.
• Chap. II.: Of the Matter of Government.
• Chap. III.: Of the Privation of Government.
• Chap. IV.: Of the Form of Government.
• Chap. V.: Of Form In the Civil Parts.
• Chap. VI.: Of Form In the Religious Part.
• Chap. VII.: Of Form In the Military Part.
• Chap. VIII.: Of Form In the Legal Part.
• Chap. IX.: Of Form In the Judicial Part.
• Chap. X.: Of the Administration of Government, Or Reason of State.
• Political Aphorisms.
• Seven Models of a Commonwealth: Or, Brief Directions Shewing How a Fit and Perfect Model of Popular Government May Be Made, Found, Or Understood.
• The First Part.
• Divers Models the First Model of Popular Government Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Israel.
• A Second Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d.
• A Third Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Sparta.
• A Fourth Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Athens.
• A Fifth Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Rome.
• A Sixth Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Venice.
• A Seventh Model of a Commonwealth Propos’d. the Commonwealth of Holland.
• The Second Part, Proposing a Model of a Commonwealth Fitted to the Present State of This Nation.
• Conclusion; Or, the Use of These Propositions.
• The Ways and Means Wherby an Equal and Lasting Commonwealth May Be Suddenly Introduc’d, and Perfectly Founded, With the Free Consent and Actual Confirmation of the Whole People of England.
• The Humble Petition of Divers Well Affected Persons, Deliver’d the 6th Day of July, 1659, With the Parlament’s Answer Therto.
• Appendix, Containing All the Political Tracts of James Harrington, Esq; Omitted In Mr. Toland ’s Edition of His Works.
• Pian Piano: Or, Intercourse Between H. Ferne, D. D. And J. Harrington, Esq; Upon Occasion of the Doctor’s Censure of the Commonwealth of Oceana.
• Epistle to the Reader.
• Intercourse Between H. Ferne, D. D. And James Harrington, Esq; Upon Occasion of the Doctor’s Censure of the Commonwealth of Oceana.
• The Queries I Shall Interweave With the Doctor’s Answer Unto Each of Them, Returned Unto Me With This Preamble.
• The First Query. How Much, Or In What the Author of Oceana Is Mistaken, to Think the Commonwealth of the Hebrews Appliable to His Purpose.
• The Second Query.
• The Third Query.
• The Fourth Query.
• The Fifth Query.
• The Sixth Query.
• The Seventh Query.
• The Stumbling-block of Disobedience and Rebellion, Cunningly Imputed By P. H. Unto Calvin, Remov’d, In a Letter to the Said P. H. From J. H.
• A Letter Unto Mr. Stubs, In Answer to His Oceana Weighed, &c.
• Politicaster: Or, a Comical Discourse In Answer to Mr. Wren ’s Book, Intituled, Monarchy Asserted, Against Mr. Harrington’ S Oceana.
• Pour Enclouer Le Canon.
• A Discourse Upon This Saying: the Spirit of the Nation Is Not Yet to Be Trusted With Liberty; Lest It Introduce Monarchy, Or Invade the Liberty of Conscience.
• A Discourse Shewing, That the Spirit of Parliaments, With a Council In the Intervals, Is Not to Be Trusted For a Settlement; Lest It Introduce Monarchy, and Persecution For Conscience.
• A Parallel of the Spirit of the People With the Spirit of Mr. Rogers; and an Appeal Thereupon Unto the Reader, Whether the Spirit of the People, Or the Spirit of Men Like Mr. Rogers, Be the Fitter to Be Trusted With the Government.
• A Sufficient Answer to Mr. Stubb.
• A Proposition In Order to the Proposing of a Commonwealth Or Democracy.
• The Rota: Or, a Model of a Free State, Or Equal Commonwealth.

OCEANA.

1. The Preliminarys, shewing the principles of government.

2. The Council of Legislators, shewing the art of making a commonwealth.

3. The Model of the Commonwealth of Oceana, shewing the effect of such an art.

4. The Corollary, shewing som consequences of such a government.

The Preliminarys, shewing the principles of government.

JANOTTI, the most excellent describer of the commonwealth of Venice, divides the whole series of government into two times or periods: the one ending with the liberty of Rome, which was the course or empire, as I may call it, of antient prudence, first discover’d to mankind by God himself in the fabric of the commonwealth of Israel, and afterwards pick’d out of his footsteps in nature, and unanimously follow’d by the Greecs and Romans: the other beginning with the arms of Cæsar, which, extinguishing liberty, were the transition of antient into modern prudence, introduc’d by those inundations of Huns, Goths, Vandals, Lombards, Saxons, which, breaking the Roman empire, deform’d the whole face of the world with those ill features of government, which at this time are becom far worse in these western parts, except Venice, which escaping the hands of the Barbarians, by virtue of its impregnable situation, has had its ey fix’d upon antient prudence, and is attain’d to a perfection even beyond the copy.

Definitions of government.Relation being had to these two times, government (to define it de jure, or according to antient prudence) is an art wherby a civil society of men is instituted and preserv’d upon the foundation of common right or interest; or (to follow Aristotle and Livy) it is the empire of laws, and not of men.

And government (to define it de facto, or according to modern prudence) is an art wherby som man, or som few men, subject a city or a nation, and rule it according to his or their privat interest: which, because the laws in such cases are made according to the interest of a man, or of som few familys, may be said to be the empire of men, and not of laws.

The former kind is that which Machiavel (whose books are neglected) is the only politician that has gon about to retrieve; and that Leviathan (who would have his book impos’d upon the universitys) gos about to destroy.Pag. 180. For, It is (says he) another error ofAristotle’s politics, that in a well-order’d commonwealth not men should govern, but the laws.Pag. 377.What man that has his natural senses, tho he can neither write nor read, dos not find himself govern’d by them he fears, and believes can kill or hurt him when he obeys not? Or, who believes that the law can hurt him, which is but words and paper, without the hands and swords of men? I confess, that * the magistrat upon his bench is that to the law, which a gunner upon his platform is to his cannon. Nevertheless, I should not dare to argue with a man of any ingenuity after this manner. A whole army, tho they can neither write nor read, are not afraid of a platform, which they know is but earth or stone; nor of a cannon, which without a hand to give fire to it, is but cold iron; therfore a whole army is afraid of one man. But of this kind is the ratiocination of Leviathan (as I shall shew in divers places that com in my way) throout his whole politics, or worse; as where he says ofAristotleand ofCicero,of the Greecs, and of the Romans, who liv’d under popular states, that they deriv’d those rights not from the principles of nature, but transcrib’d them into their books, out of the practice of their own commonwealths, as grammarians describe the rules of language out of poets.Pag. 111. Which is as if a man should tell famous Hervy, that he transcrib’d his circulation of the blood not out of the principles of nature, but out of the anatomy of this or that body.

To go on therfore with his preliminary discourse, I shall divide it (according to the two definitions of government relating to Janotti’s two times) in two parts. The first treating of the principles of government in general, and according to the antients: the second treating of the late governments of Oceana in particular, and in that of modern prudence.

Division of government.Government, according to the antients, and their learn’d disciple Machiavel, the only politician of later ages, is of three kinds; the government of one man, or of the better sort, or of the whole people: which by their more learn’d names are call’d monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. These they hold, thro their proneness to degenerat, to be all evil. For wheras they that govern should govern according to reason, if they govern according to passion, they do that which they should not do. Wherfore as reason and passion are two things, so government by reason is one thing, and the corruption of government by passion is another thing, but not always another government: as a body that is alive is one thing, and a body that is dead is another thing, but not always another creature, tho the corruption of one coms at length to be the generation of another. The corruption then of monarchy is call’d tyranny; that of aristocracy, oligarchy; and that of democracy, anarchy. But legislators having found these three governments at the best to be naught, have invented another consisting of a mixture of them all, which only is good. This is the doctrin of the antients.

But Leviathan is positive, that they are all deceiv’d, and that there is no other government in nature than one of the three; as also that the flesh of them cannot stink, the names of their corruptions being but the names of mens phansies, which will be understood when we are shown which of them was Senatus Populusque Romanus.

To go my own way, and yet to follow the antients, the principles of government are twofold; internal, or the goods of the mind; and external, or the goods of fortune.Goods of the mind and of fortune. The goods of the mind are natural or acquir’d virtues, as wisdom, prudence, and courage, &c. The goods of fortune are riches. There be goods also of the body, as health, beauty, strength; but these are not to be brought into account upon this score, because if a man or an army acquires victory or empire, it is more from their disciplin, arms, and courage, than from their natural health, beauty, or strength, in regard that a people conquer’d may have more of natural strength, beauty and health, and yet find little remedy. The principles of government then are in the goods of the mind, or in the goods of fortune.Empire and authority. To the goods of the mind answers authority; to the goods of fortune, power or empire. Wherfore Leviathan, tho he be right where he says that riches are power, is mistaken where he says that prudence, or the reputation of prudence, is power: for the learning or prudence of a man is no more power than the learning or prudence of a book or author, which is properly authority. A learned writer may have authority tho he has no power; and a foolish magistrat may have power, tho he has otherwise no esteem or authority. The difference of these two is observ’d by Livy in Evander, of whom he says,* that he govern’d rather by the authority of others, than by his own power.

Empire.To begin with riches, in regard that men are hung upon these, not of choice as upon the other, but of necessity and by the teeth: for as much as he who wants bread, is his servant that will feed him; if a man thus feeds a whole people, they are under his empire.

Division of empire.Empire is of two kinds, domestic and national, or foren and provincial.

Domestic empire.Domestic empire is founded upon dominion.

Dominion.Dominion is property real or personal, that is to say, in lands, or in mony and goods.

Balance in lands.Lands, or the parts and parcels of a territory, are held by the proprietor or proprietors, lord or lords of it, in som proportion; and such (except it be in a city that has little or no land, and whose revenue is in trade) as is the proportion or balance of dominion or property in land, such is the nature of the empire.

Absolute monarchy.If one man be sole landlord of a territory, or overbalance the people, for example three parts in four, he is Grand Signior: for so the Turk is call’d from his property; and his empire is absolute monarchy.

Mix’d monarchy.If the few or a nobility, or a nobility with the clergy be landlords, or overbalance the people to the like proportion, it makes the Gothic balance (to be shewn at large in the second part of this discourse) and the empire is mix’d monarchy, as that of Spain, Poland, and late of Oceana.

Popular government.And if the whole people be landlords, or hold the lands so divided among them, that no one man, or number of men, within the compass of the few or aristocracy, overbalance them, the empire (without the interposition of force) is a commonwealth.

Tyranny.If force be interpos’d in any of these three cases, it must either frame the government to the foundation, or the foundation to the government;Oligarchy. or holding the government not according to the balance, it is not natural, but violent:Anarchy. and therfore if it be at the devotion of a prince, it is tyranny; if at the devotion of the few, oligarchy; or if in the power of the people, anarchy. Each of which confusions, the balance standing otherwise, is but of short continuance, because against the nature of the balance, which, not destroy’d, destroys that which opposes it.

But there be certain other confusions, which, being rooted in the balance, are of longer continuance, and of worse consequence; as, first, where a nobility holds half the property, or about that proportion, and the people the other half; in which case, without altering the balance, there is no remedy but the one must eat out the other: as the people did the nobility in Athens, and the nobility the people in Rome. Secondly, when a prince holds about half the dominion, and the people the other half (which was the case of the Roman emperors, planted partly upon their military colonies, and partly upon the senat and the people) the government becoms a very shambles both of the princes and the people. Somwhat of this nature are certain governments at this day, which are said to subsist by confusion. In this case, to fix the balance, is to entail misery: but in the three former, not to fix it, is to lose the government. Wherfore it being unlawful in Turky, that any should possess land but the Grand Signior, the balance is fix’d by the law, and that empire firm. Nor, tho the kings often fell, was the throne of Oceana known to shake, until the statute of alienations broke the pillars, by giving way to the nobility to sell their estates.* While Lacedemon held to the division of land made by Lycurgus, it was immoveable; but, breaking that, could stand no longer. This kind of law fixing the balance in lands is call’d Agrarian, and was first introduc’d by God himself, who divided the land of Canaan to his people by lots, and is of such virtue, that wherever it has held, that government has not alter’d, except by consent; as in that unparallel’d example of the people of Israel, when being in liberty they would needs chuse a king. But without an Agrarian, government, whether monarchical, aristocratical, or popular, has no long lease.

As for dominion personal or in mony, it may now and then stir up a Melius or a Manlius, which, if the commonwealth be not provided with som kind of dictatorian power, may be dangerous, tho it has bin seldom or never successful: because to property producing empire, it is requir’d that it should have som certain root or foot-hold, which, except in land, it cannot have, being otherwise as it were upon the wing.

Balance in mony.Nevertheless, in such cities as subsist mostly by trade, and have little or no land, as Holland and Genoa, the balance of treasure may be equal to that of land in the cases mention’d.

But Leviathan, tho he seems to scew at antiquity, following his furious master Carneades, has caught hold of the public sword, to which he reduces all manner and matter of government; as, where he affirms this opinion [that any monarch receives his power by covenant, that is to say, upon conditions] to procede from the not understanding this easy truth, That covenants being but words and breath, have no power to oblige, contain, constrain, or protect any man, but what they have from the public sword.Pag. 89. But as he said of the law, that without this sword it is but paper; so he might have thought of this sword, that without a hand it is but cold iron. The hand which holds this sword is the militia of a nation; and the militia of a nation is either an army in the field, or ready for the field upon occasion. But an army is a beast that has a great belly, and must be fed; wherfore this will com to what pastures you have, and what pastures you have will com to the balance of property, without which the public sword is but a name or mere spitfrog.Arms and contracts. Wherfore to set that which Leviathan says of arms and of contracts a little streighter; he that can graze this beast with the great belly, as the Turk does his Timariots, may well deride him that imagines he receiv’d his power by covenant, or is oblig’d to any such toy: it being in this case only that covenants are but words and breath. But if the property of the nobility, stock’d with their tenants and retainers, be the pasture of that beast, the ox knows his master’s crib; and it is impossible for a king in such a constitution to reign otherwise than by covenant; or if he breaks it, it is words that com to blows.

Pag. 90.But, says he, when an assembly of men is made soverain, then no man imagins any such covenant to have past in the institution. But what was that by Publicola of appeal to the people, or that wherby the people had their tribuns? Fy, says he, no body is so dull as to say, that the people of Rome made a covenant with the Romans, to hold the soverainty on such or such conditions; which not perform’d, the Romans might depose the Roman people. In which there be several remarkable things; for he holds the commonwealth of Rome to have consisted of one assembly, wheras it consisted of the senat and the people; That they were not upon covenant, wheras every law enacted by them was a covenant between them; That the one assembly was made soverain, wheras the people, who only were soverain, were such from the beginning, as appears by the antient stile of their covenants or laws,*The senat has resolv’d, the people have decreed; That a council being made soverain, cannot be made such upon conditions, wheras the Decemvirs being a council that was made soverain, was made such upon conditions; That all conditions or covenants making a soverain, the soverain being made, are void; whence it must follow, that, the Decemviri being made, were ever after the lawful government of Rome, and that it was unlawful for the commonwealth of Rome to depose the Decemvirs; as also that Cicero, if he wrote otherwise out of his commonwealth, did not write out of nature.Pag. 89. But to com to others that see more of this balance.

B. 5, 3. 3. 9.You have Aristotle full of it in divers places, especially where he says, that immoderate wealth, as where one man or the few have greater possessions than the equality or the frame of the commonwealth will bear, is an occasion of sedition, which ends for the greater part in monarchy; and that for this cause the ostracism has bin receiv’d in divors places, as in Argos and Athens. But that it were better to prevent the growth in the beginning, than, when it has got head, to seek the remedy of such an evil.

D. B. 1, c. 55.Machiavel has miss’d it very narrowly and more dangerously; for not fully perceiving that if a commonwealth be gall’d by the gentry, it is by their overbalance, he speaks of the gentry as hostil to popular governments, and of popular governments as hostil to the gentry; and makes us believe that the people in such are so inrag’d against them, that where they meet a gentleman they kill him: which can never be prov’d by any one example, unless in civil war; seeing that even in Switzerland the gentry are not only safe, but in honor. But the balance, as I have laid it down, tho unseen by Machiavel, is that which interprets him, and that which he confirms by his judgment in many others as well as in this place, where he concludes, That he who will go about to make a commonwealth where there be many gentlemen, unless he first destroys them, undertakes an impossibility. And that he who goes about to introduce monarchy where the condition of the people is equal, shall never bring it to pass, unless he cull out such of them as are the most turbulent and ambitious, and make them gentlemen or noblemen, not in name but in effect; that is, by inriching them with lands, castles, and treasures, that may gain them power among therest, and bring in the rest to dependence upon themselves, to the end that they maintaining their ambition by the prince, the prince may maintain his power by them.

Wherfore as in this place I agree with Machiavel, that a nobility or gentry, overbalancing a popular government, is the utter bane and destruction of it; so I shall shew in another, that a nobility or gentry, in a popular government, not overbalancing it, is the very life and soul of it.

The right of the militia stated.By what has bin said, it should seem that we may lay aside further disputes of the public sword, or of the right of the militia; which, be the government what it will, or let it change how it can, is inseparable from the overbalance in dominion: nor, if otherwise stated by the law or custom (as in the commonwealth of Rome* , where the people having the sword, the nobility came to have the overbalance) avails it to any other end than destruction. For as a building swaying from the foundation must fall, so it fares with the law swaying from reason, and the militia from the balance of dominion. And thus much for the balance of national or domestic empire, which is in dominion.

The balance of foren empire.The balance of foren or provincial empire is of a contrary nature. A man may as well say, that it is unlawful for him who has made a fair and honest purchase to have tenants, as for a government that has made a just progress, and inlargement of it self, to have provinces. But how a province may be justly acquir’d, appertains to another place. In this I am to shew no more than how or upon what kind of balance it is to be held; in order wherto I shall first shew upon what kind of balance it is not to be held. It has bin said, that national or independent empire, of what kind soever, is to be exercis’d by them that have the proper balance of dominion in the nation; wherfore provincial or dependent empire is not to be exercis’d by them that have the balance of dominion in the province, because that would bring the government from provincial and dependent, to national and independent. Absolute monarchy, as that of the Turks, neither plants its people at home nor abroad, otherwise than as tenants for life or at will; wherfore its national and provincial government is all one. But in governments that admit the citizen or subject to dominion in lands, the richest are they that share most of the power at home; wheras the richest among the provincials, tho native subjects, or citizens that have bin transplanted, are least admitted to the government abroad; for men, like flowers or roots being transplanted, take after the soil wherin they grow. Wherfore the commonwealth of Rome, by planting colonys of its citizens within the bounds of Italy, took the best way of propagating itself, and naturalizing the country; wheras if it had planted such colonys without the bounds of Italy, it would have alienated the citizens, and given a root to liberty abroad, that might have sprung up foren, or savage, and hostil to her: wherfore it never made any such dispersion of itself and its strength, till it was under the yoke of the emperors, who disburdening themselves of the people, as having less apprehension of what they could do abroad than at home, took a contrary course.

TheMamalucs (which till any man shew me the contrary, I shall presume to have bin a commonwealth consisting of an army, wherof the common soldier was the people, the commission officer the senat, and the general the prince) were foreners, and by nation Circassians, that govern’d Egypt; wherfore these never durst plant themselves upon dominion, which growing naturally up into the national interest, must have dissolv’d the foren yoke in that province.

The like in some sort may be said of Venice, the government wherof is usually mistaken: for Venice, tho it dos not take in the people, never excluded them. This commonwealth, the orders wherof are the most democratical or popular of all others, in regard of the exquisit rotation of the senat, at the first institution took in the whole people; they that now live under the government without participation of it, are such as have since either voluntarily chosen so to do, or were subdu’d by arms. Wherfore the subject of Venice is govern’d by provinces; and the balance of dominion not standing, as has bin said, with provincial government: as the Mamalucs durst not cast their government upon this balance in their provinces, lest the national interest should have rooted out the foren, so neither dare the Venetians take in their subjects upon this balance, lest the foren interest should root out the national (which is that of the 3000 now governing) and by diffusing the commonwealth throout her territorys, lose the advantage of her situation, by which in great part it subsists. And such also is the government of the Spaniard in the Indies, to which he deputes natives of his own country, not admitting the Creolios to the government of those provinces, tho descended from Spaniards.

But if a prince or a commonwealth may hold a territory that is foren in this, it may be ask’d, why he may not hold one that is native in the like manner? To which I answer, because he can hold a foren by a native territory, but not a native by a foren: and as hitherto I have shewn what is not the provincial balance, so by this answer it may appear what it is, namely, the overbalance of a native territory to a foren; for as one country balances itself by the distribution of property according to the proportion of the same, so one country overbalances another by advantage of divers kinds. For example, the commonwealth of Rome overbalanc’d her provinces by the vigor of a more excellent government oppos’d to a crazier, or by a more exquisit militia oppos’d to one inferior in courage or disciplin. The like was that of the Mamalucs, being a hardy people, to the Ægyptians that were a sost one. And the balance of situation is in this kind of wonderful effect; seeing the king of Denmark, being none of the most potent princes, is able at the Sound to take toll of the greatest: and as this king by the advantage of the land can make the sea tributary; so Venice, by the advantage of the sea, in whose arms she is impregnable, can make the land to feed her Gulf. For the colonys in the Indies, they are yet babes that cannot live without sucking the breasts of their mother citys, but such as I mistake if when they com of age they do not wean themselves: which causes me to wonder at princes that delight to be exhausted in that way. And so much for the principles of power, whether national or provincial, domestic or foren; being such as are external, and founded in the goods of fortune.

Authority.I com to the principles of authority, which are internal, and founded upon the goods of the mind. These the legislator that can unite in his government with those of fortune, coms nearest to the work of God, whose government consists of heaven and earth: which was said by Plato, tho in different words, as, when princes should be philosophers, or philosophers princes, the world would be happy.Eccles. 10. 15. And says Solomon,There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, which procedes from the ruler (enimvero neque nobilem, neque ingenuum,Tacit.nec libertinum quidem armis præponere, regia utilitas est) Folly is set in great dignity,Grot.and the rich (either in virtue and wisdom, in the goods of the mind, or those of fortune upon that balance which gives them a sense of the national interest) sit in low places. I have seen servants upon horses, and princes walking as servants upon the earth. Sad complaints, that the principles of power and of authority, the goods of the mind and of fortune, do not meet and twine in the wreath or crown of empire! wherfore, if we have any thing of piety or of prudence, let us raise our selves out of the mire of privat interest to the contemplation of virtue, and put a hand to the removal of this evil from under the sun; this evil against which no government that is not secur’d, can be good; this evil from which no government that is secure must be perfect. Solomon tells us, that the cause of it is from the ruler, from those principles of power, which, balanc’d upon earthly trash, exclude the heavenly treasures of virtue, and that influence of it upon government, which is authority. We have wander’d the earth to find out the balance of power: but to find out that of authority, we must ascend, as I said, nearer heaven, or to the image of God, which is the soul of man.

Thesoul of man (whose life or motion is perpetual contemplation or thought) is the mistress of two potent rivals, the one reason, the other passion, that are in continual suit; and, according as she gives up her will to these or either of them, is the felicity or misery which man partakes in this mortal life.

For as whatever was passion in the contemplation of a man, being brought forth by his will into action, is vice and the bondage of sin; so whatever was reason in the contemplation of a man, being brought forth by his will into action, is virtue and the freedom of soul.

Again, as those actions of a man that were sin acquire to himself repentance or shame, and affect others with scorn or pity; so those actions of a man that are virtue acquire to himself honor, and upon others authority.

Now government is no other than the soul of a nation or city: wherfore that which was reason in the debate of a commonwealth being brought forth by the result, must be virtue; and forasmuch as the soul of a city or nation is the soverain power, her virtue must be law. But the government whose law is virtue, and whose virtue is law, is the same whose empire is authority, and whose authority is empire.

Again, if the liberty of a man consists in the empire of his reason, the absence wherof would betray him to the bondage of his passions; then the liberty of a commonwealth consists in the empire of her laws, the absence wherof would betray her to the lust of tyrants. And these I conceive to be the principles upon which Aristotle and Livy (injuriously accus’d by Leviathan for not writing out of nature) have grounded their assertion, That a commonwealth is an empire of laws, and not of men.Pag. 110. But they must not carry it so. For, says he, the liberty, wherof there is so frequent and honourable mention in the historys and philosophy of the antient Greecs and Romans, and the writings and discourses of those that from them have receiv’d all their learning in the politics, is not the liberty of particular men, but the liberty of the commonwealth. He might as well have said, that the estates of particular men in a commonwealth are not the riches of particular men, but the riches of the commonwealth; for equality of estates causes equality of power, and equality of power is the liberty not only of the commonwealth, but of every man. But sure a man would never be thus irreverent with the greatest authors, and positive against all antiquity, without som certain demonstration of truth: and, what is it? why, there is written on the turrets of the city of Lucca in great characters at this day the word LIBERTAS; yet no man can thence infer, that a particular man has more liberty or immunity from the service of the commonwealth there, than in Constantinople. Whether a commonwealth be monarchical or popular, the freedom is the same. The mountain has brought forth, and we have a little equivocation! for to say, that a Luccbese has no more liberty or immunity from the laws of Lucca, than a Turk has from those of Constantinople; and to say that a Lucchese has no more liberty or immunity by the laws of Lucca, than a Turk has by those of Constantinople, are pretty different speeches. The first may be said of all governments alike; the second scarce of any two; much less of these, seeing it is known, that wheras the greatest Basha is a tenant, as well of his head as of his estate, at the will of his lord, the meanest Lucchese that has land, is a freeholder of both, and not to be control’d but by the law, and that fram’d by every privat man to no other end (or they may thank themselves) than to protect the liberty of every privat man, which by that means coms to be the liberty of the commonwealth.

But seeing they that make the laws in commonwealths are but men, the main question seems to be, how a commonwealth coms to be an empire of laws, and not of men? or how the debate or result of a commonwealth is so sure to be according to reason; seeing they who debate, and they who resolve, be but men? and as often as reason is against a man, so often will a man be against reason.Hobs.

This is thought to be a shrewd saying, but will do no harm; for be it so that reason is nothing but interest, there be divers interests, and so divers reasons.

As first, There is privat reason, which is the interest of a privat man.

Secondly, There is reason of state, which is the interest (or error, as was said by Solomon) of the ruler or rulers, that is to say, of the prince, of the nobility, or of the people.

Thirdly, There is that reason, which is the interest of mankind, or of the whole.Hooker. B. 1.Now if we see even in those natural agents that want sense, that as in themselves they have a law which directs them in the means whereby they tend to their own perfection, so likewise that another law there is, which touches them as they are sociable parts united into one body, a law which binds them each to serve to others good, and all to prefer the good of the whole, before whatsoever their own particular; as when stones, or heavy things forsake their ordinary wont or center, and fly upwards, as if they heard themselves commanded to let go the good they privately wish, and to relieve the present distress of nature in common. There is a common right, law of nature, or interest of the whole; which is more excellent, and so acknowledg’d to be by the agents themselves, than the right or interest of the parts only.Grot.Wherfore tho it may be truly said that the creatures are naturally carry’d forth to their proper utility or profit, that ought not to be taken in too general a sense; seeing divers of them abstain from their own profit, either in regard of those of the same kind, or at least of their young.

Mankind then must either be less just than the creature, or acknowlege also his common interest to be common right. And if reason be nothing else but interest, and the interest of mankind be the right interest, then the reason of mankind must be right reason. Now compute well; for if the interest of popular government com the nearest to the interest of mankind, then the reason of popular government must com the nearest to right reason.

But it may be said, that the difficulty remains yet; for be the interest of popular government right reason, a man does not look upon reason as it is right or wrong in itself, but as it makes for him or against him. Wherfore unless you can shew such orders of a government, as, like those of God in nature, shall be able to constrain this or that creature to shake off that inclination which is more peculiar to it, and take up that which regards the common good or interest; all this is to no more end, than to persuade every man in a popular government not to carve himself of that which he desires most, but to be mannerly at the public table, and give the best from himself to decency and the common interest. But that such orders may be establish’d, as may, nay must give the upper hand in all cases to common right or interest, notwithstanding the nearness of that which sticks to every man in privat, and this in a way of equal certainty and facility, is known even to girls, being no other than those that are of common practice with them in divers cases. For example, two of them have a cake yet undivided, which was given between them: that each of them therfore might have that which is due, divide, says one to the other, and I will chuse; or let me divide, and you shall chuse. If this be but once agreed upon, it is enough: for the divident, dividing unequally, loses, in regard that the other takes the better half; wherfore she divides equally, and so both have right. O the depth of the wisdom of God! and yet by the mouths of babes and sucklings has he set forth his strength; that which great philosophers are disputing upon in vain, is brought to light by two harmless girls, even the whole mystery of a commonwealth, which lys only in dividing and chusing. Nor has God (if his works in nature be understood) left so much to mankind to dispute upon, as who shall divide, and who chuse, but distributed them for ever into two orders, wherof the one has the natural right of dividing, and the other of chusing. For example:

The orders of popular government in nature.A Commonwealth is but a civil society of men: let us take any number of men (as twenty) and immediatly make a commonwealth. Twenty men (if they be not all idiots, perhaps if they be) can never com so together, but there will be such a difference in them, that about a third will be wiser, or at least less foolish than all the rest; these upon acquaintance, tho it be but small, will be discover’d, and (as stags that have the largest heads) lead the herd: for while the six discoursing and arguing one with another, shew the eminence of their parts, the fourteen discover things that they never thought on; or are clear’d in divers truths which had formerly perplex’d them. Wherfore in matter of common concernment, difficulty, or danger, they hang upon their lips as children upon their fathers; and the influence thus acquir’d by the fix, the eminence of whose parts are found to be a stay and comfort to the fourteen, is* the authority of the fathers. Wherfore this can be no other than a natural aristocracy diffus’d by God throout the whole body of mankind to this end and purpose; and therfore such as the people have not only a natural, but a positive obligation to make use of as their guides; as where the people of Israel are commanded to take wise men, and understanding, and known among their tribes, to be made rulers over them.Deut. 1. 13. The six then approv’d of, as in the present case, are the senat, not by hereditary right, or in regard of the greatness of their estates only (which would tend to such power as might force or draw the people) but by election for their excellent parts, which tends to the advancement of the influence of their virtue or authority that leads the people. Wherfore the office of the senat is not to be commanders, but counsellors of the people; and that which is proper to counsellors is first to debate, and afterward to give advice in the business whereupon they have debated; whence the decrees of the senat are never laws, nor so† call’d: and these being maturely fram’d, it is their duty‡ to propose in the case to the people. Wherfore the senat is no more than the debate of the commonwealth. But to debate, is to discern or put a difference between things that, being alike, are not the same; or it is separating and weighing this reason against that, and that reason against this, which is dividing.

The people.The Senat then having divided, who shall chuse? ask the girls: for if she that divided must have chosen also, it had bin little worse for the other in case she had not divided at all, but kept the whole cake to her self, in regard that being to chuse too, she divided accordingly. Wherfore if the Senat have any farther power than to divide, the commonwealth can never be equal. But in a commonwealth consisting of a single council, there is no other to chuse than that which divided; whence it is, that such a council fails not to scramble, that is, to be factious, there being no other dividing of the cake in that case but among themselves.

Nor is there any remedy but to have another council to chuse. The wisdom of the few may be the light of mankind; but the interest of the few is not the profit of mankind, nor of a commonwealth. Wherfore seeing we have granted interest to be reason, they must not chuse, left it put out their light. But as the council dividing consists of the wisdom of the commonwealth, so the assembly or council chusing should consist of the interest of the commonwealth: as the wisdom of the commonwealth is in the aristocracy, so the interest of the commonwealth is in the whole body of the people. And wheras this, in case the commonwealth consist of a whole nation, is too unweildy a body to be assembled, this council is to consist of such a representative as may be equal, and so constituted, as can never contract any other interest than that of the whole people; the manner wherof, being such as is best shewn by exemplification, I remit to the model. But in the present case, the six dividing, and the fourteen chusing, must of necessity take in the whole interest of the twenty.

Dividing and chusing in the language of a commonwealth is debating and resolving; and whatsoever upon debate of the senat is propos’d to the people, and resolv’d by them, is enacted* by the authority of the fathers, and by the power of the people, which concurring, make a law.

The magistracy.But the law being made, says Leviathan,is but words and paper without the bands and swords of men; wherfore as these two orders of a commonwealth, namely the senat and the people, are legislative, so of necessity there must be a third to be executive of the laws made, and this is the magistracy; in which order, with the rest being wrought up by art, the commonwealth consists of the senat proposing, the people resolving, and the magistracy executing: wherby partaking of the aristocracy as in the senat, of the democracy as in the people, and of monarchy as in the magistracy, it is complete. Now there being no other commonwealth but this in art or nature, it is no wonder if Machiavel has shew’d us that the ancients held this only to be good; but it seems strange to me, that they should hold that there could be any other: for if there be such a thing as pure monarchy, yet that there should be such a one as pure aristocracy, or pure democracy, is not in my understanding. But the magistracy both in number and function is different in different commonwealths. Nevertheless there is one condition of it that must be the same in every one, or it dissolves the commonwealth where it is wanting. And this is no less than that as the hand of the magistrat is the executive power of the law, so the head of the magistrat is answerable to the people, that his execution be according to the law; by which Leviathan may see that the hand or sword that executes the law is in it, and not above it.

The orders of a commonwealth in experience, as thatNow whether I have rightly transcrib’d these principles of a commonwealth out of nature, I shall appeal to God, and to the world. To God in the fabric of the commonwealth of Israel: and to the world in the universal series of antient prudence. But in regard the same commonwealths will be open’d at large in the council of legislators, I shall touch them for the present but slightly, beginning with that of Israel.

Of Israel.The commonwealth of Israel consisted of the senat, the people, and the magistracy.

The people by their first division, which was genealogical, were contain’d under their thirteen tribes, houses, or familys; wherof the firstborn in each was prince of his tribe, and had the leading of it: the tribe of Levi only being set apart to serve at the altar, had no other prince but the high priest.Numb. 1. In their second division they were divided locally by their agrarian, or the distribution of the land of Canaan to them by lot, the tithe of all remaining to Levi; whence according to their local division, the tribes are reckon’d but twelve.Josh. ch. 13, to ch. 42.

The people.The assemblys of the people thus divided were methodically gather’d by trumpets to the congregation; which was, it should seem, of two sorts.Numb. 10. 7. For if it were call’d with one trumpet only, the princes of the tribes and the elders only assembl’d;Numb. 10. 4. but if it were call’d with two, the whole people gather’d themselves to the congregation, for so it is render’d by the English;Numb. 10. 3. but in the Greec it is call’d Ecclesia, or the church of God, and by the Talmudist, the great Synagog.Judg. 20. 2. The word Ecclesia was also anciently and properly us’d for the civil congregations or assemblys of the people in Athens, Lacedemon, and Ephesus, where it is so call’d in Scripture, tho it be otherwise render’d by the translators, not much as I conceive to their commendation, seeing by that means they have lost us a good lesson, the apostles borrowing that name for their spiritual congregations, to the end that we might see they intended the government of the church to be democratical or popular, as is also plain in the rest of their constitutions.Acts 19. 23.

The church or congregation of the people of Israel assembl’d in a military manner, and had the result of the commonwealth, or the power of confirming all their laws, tho propos’d even by God himself; as where they make him king; and where they reject or depose him as civil magistrat, and elect Saul.Judg. 20. 2 It is manifest, that he gives no such example to a legislator in a popular government as to deny or evade the power of the people,Exod. 19. which were a contradiction: but tho he deservedly blames the ingratitude of the people in that action, he commands Samuel,1 Sam. 8. 7. being next under himself supreme magistrat, to hearken to their voice (for where the suffrage of the people goes for nothing, it is no commonwealth) and comforts him saying, They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me that I should not reign over them. But to reject him that he should not reign over them, was as civil magistrat to depose him. The power therfore which the people had to depose even God himself as he was civil magistrat, leaves little doubt but that they had power to have rejected any of those laws confirmed by them throout the Scripture,Deut. 29. which (to omit the several parcels) are generally contain’d under two heads, those that were made by covenant with the people in the land of Moab, and those which were made by covenant with the people in Horeb; which two, I think, amount to the whole body of the Israelitish laws.Josh. 7. 16. But if all and every one of the laws of Israel being propos’d by God, were no otherwise enacted than by covenant with the people,Judg 20. 8, 9, 10. then that only which was resolv’d by the people of Israel was their law;1 Sam. 7. 6, 7, 8. and so the result of that commonwealth was in the people. Nor had the people the result only in matter of law,1 Chron. 13. 2. but the power in som cases of judicature; as also the right of levying war;2 Chron. 30. 4. cognizance in matter of religion; and the election of their magistrats, as the judg or dictator, the king, the prince:Judg. 11. 11. which functions were exercised by the Synagoga magna or congregation of Israel, not always in one manner;1 Sam. 10. 17. for sometimes they were perform’d by the suffrage of the people, viva voce; sometimes by the lot only;1 Mac. [Editor: illegible character] and at others by the ballot, or by a mixture of the lot with the suffrage, as in the case of Eldad and Medad,Exod. 9. 3, 4, 5. which I shall open with the senate.

Josh. 7.The senat of Israel call’d in the Old Testament the seventy elders, and in the New the sanhedrim (which word is usually translated the council) was appointed by God,1 Sam. 10. [Editor: illegible character] and consisted of seventy elders besides Moses, which were at first elected by the people; but in what manner is rather intimated than shewn. Nevertheless, because I cannot otherwise understand the passage concerning Eldad and Medad,Numb. 11. of whom it is said that they were of them that were written,but went not up to the tabernacle, then with the Talmudists,Deut. [Editor: illegible character] I conceive that Eldad and Medad had the suffrage of the tribes,Numb. 11. and so were written as competitors for magistracy; but coming afterwards to the lot, fail’d of it, and therfore went not up to the tabernacle, or place of confirmation by God, or to the sessionhouse of the senat with the seventy upon whom the lot fell to be senators: for the sessionhouse of the sanhedrim was first in the court of the tabernacle, and afterwards in that of the temple, where it came to be call’d the stone chamber or pavement.John. If this were the ballot of Israel, that of Venice is the same transpos’d: for in Venice the competitor is chosen as it were by the lot, in regard that the electors are so made, and the magistrat is chosen by the suffrage of the great council or assembly of the people. But the sanhedrim of Israel being thus constituted, Moses for his time, and after him his successor, sat in the midst of it as prince or archon, and at his left hand the orator or father of the senat; the rest or the bench coming round with either horn like a crescent, had a scribe attending upon the tip of it.

This senat, in regard the legislator of Israel was infallible, and the laws given by God such as were not fit to be altered by men, is much different in the exercise of their power from all other senats, except that of the Areopagits in Athens, which also was little more than a supreme judicatory; for it will hardly, as I conceive, be found that the sanhedrim propos’d to the people till the return of the children of Israel out of captivity under Esdras, at which time there was a new law made, namely, for a kind of excommunication, or rather banishment, which had never bin before in Israel. Nevertheless it is not to be thought that the sanhedrim had not always that right, which from the time of Esdras is more frequently exercis’d, of proposing to the people, but that they forbore it in regard of the fulness and infallibility of the law already made, wherby it was needless.The magistracy. Wherfore the function of this council, which is very rare in a senat, was executive, and consisted in the administration of the law made; and wheras the council it self is often und rstood in Scripture by the priest and the Levit, there is no more in that save only that the priests and the Levits, who otherwise had no power at all, being in the younger years of this commonwealth, those that were best study’d in the laws were the most frequently elected into the sanhedrim.Deut. 17. 9. 10, 11. For the courts consisting of three and twenty elders sitting in the gates of every city, and the triumvirats of judges constituted almost in every village, which were parts of the executive magistracy subordinat to the sanhedrim, I shall take them at better leisure, and in the larger discourse; but these being that part of this commonwealth which was instituted by Moses upon the advice of Jethro the priest of Midian (as I conceive a Heathen) are to me a sufficient warrant even from God himself who confirm’d them, to make farther use of human prudence, wherever I find it bearing a testimony to it self, whether in Heathen commonwealths or others: and the rather, because so it is, that we who have the holy Scriptures, and in them the original of a commonwealth, made by the same hand that made the world, are either altogether blind or negligent of it; while the Heathens have all written theirs, as if they had had no other copy: as, to be more brief in the present account of that which you shall have more at large hereafter:Exod. 18.

Of Athens.Athens consisted of the senat of the Bean proposing, of the church or assembly of the people resolving, and too often debating, which was the ruin of it; as also of the senat of the Areopagits, the nine archons, with divers other magistrats executing.

Of Lacedemon.Lacedemon consisted of the senat proposing; of the church or congregation of the people resolving only and never debating, which was the long life of it; and of the two kings, the court of the Ephors, with divers other magistats executing.

Of Carthage.Carthage consisted of the senat proposing and somtimes resolving too; of the people resolving and somtimes debating too, for which fault she was reprehended by Aristotle; and she had her suffetes, and her hundred men, with other magistrats executing.

Of Rome.Rome consisted of the senat proposing, the concio or people resolving, and too often debating, which caused her storms; as also of the consuls, censors, ædils, tribuns, pretors, questors, and other magistrats executing.

Of Venice.Venice consists of the senat or pregati proposing, and somtimes resolving too; of the great council or assembly of the people, in whom the result is constitutively; as also of the doge, the signory, the censors, the dieci, the quazancies, and other magistrats executing.

Of Switzerland and Holland.The proceding of the commonwealths of Switzerland and Holland is of a like nature, tho after a more obscure manner; for the soveraintys, whether cantons, provinces, or citys, which are the people, send their deputies commission’d and instructed by themselves (wherin they reserve the result in their own power) to the provincial or general convention, or senat, where the deputies debate, but have no other power of result than what was confer’d upon them by the people, or is farther confer’d by the same upon farther occasion. And for the executive part they have magistrats or judges in every canton, province or city, besides those which are more public, and relate to the league, as for adjusting controversies between one canton, province or city, and another; or the like between such persons as are not of the same canton, province or city.

But that we may observe a little farther how the Heathen politicians have written, not only out of nature, but as it were out of Scripture: as in the commonwealth of Israel God is said to have bin king; so the commonwealth where the law is king, is said by Aristotle to be the kingdom of God. And where by the lusts or passions of men a power is set above that of the law deriving from reason, which is the dictat of God, God in that sense is rejected or depos’d that he should not reign over them, as he was in Israel.Page 170 And yet Leviathan will have it, that by reading of these Greec and Latin (he might as well in this sense have said Hebrew) authors, young men, and all others that are unprovided of the antidot of solid reason, receiving a strong and delightful impression of the great exploits of war, atchiev’d by the conductors of their armys, receive withal a pleasing idea of all they have don besides; and imagin their great prosperity not to have proceded from the emulation of particular men, but from the virtue of their popular form of government, not considering the frequent seditions and civil wars produc’d by the imperfection of their polity. Where, first, the blame he lays to the Heathen authors, is in his sense laid to the Scripture; and wheras he holds them to be young men, or men of no antidot that are of like opinions, it should seem that Machiavel, the sole retriever of this antient prudence, is to his solid reason, a beardless boy that has newly read Livy. And how solid his reason is, may appear, where he grants the great prosperity of antient commonwealths, which is to give up the controversy. For such an effect must have som adequat cause; which to evade he insinuats that it was nothing else but the emulation of particular men: as if so great an emulation could have bin generated without as great virtue; so great virtue without the best education; and best education without the best law; or the best laws any otherwise than by the excellency of their polity.

But if som of these commonwealths, as being less perfect in their polity than others, have bin more seditious, it is not more an argument of the infirmity of this or that commonwealth in particular, than of the excellency of that kind of polity in general; which if they, that have not altogether reach’d, have nevertheless had greater prosperity, what would befal them that should reach?

In answer to which question let me invite Leviathan, who of all other governments gives the advantage to monarchy for perfection, to a better disquisition of it by these three assertions.

The first, That the perfection of government lys upon such a libration in the frame of it, that no man or men in or under it can have the interest; or having the interest, can have the power to disturb it with sedition.

The second, That monarchy, reaching the perfection of the kind, reaches not to the perfection of government; but must have som dangerous flaw in it.

The third, That popular government, reaching the perfection of the kind, reaches the perfection of government, and has no flaw in it.

The first assertion requires no proof.

For the proof of the second; monarchy, as has bin shewn, is of two kinds, the one by arms, the other by a nobility, and there is no other kind in art or nature: for if there have been antiently som governments call’d kingdoms, as one of the Goths in Spain, and another of the Vandals in Africa, where the king rul’d without a nobility, and by a council of the people only; it is expresly said by the authors that mention them, that the kings were but the captains, and that the people not only gave them laws, but depos d them as often as they pleas’d. Nor is it possible in reason that it should be otherwise in like cases; wherfore these were either no monarchys, or had greater flaws in them than any other.

But for a monarchy by arms, as that of the Turc (which of all models that ever were, coms up to the perfection of the kind) it is not in the wit or power of man to cure it of this dangerous flaw, That the Janizarys have frequent interest and perpetual power to raise sedition, and to tear the magistrat, even the prince himself, in pieces. Therfore the monarchy of Turky is no perfect government.

And for a monarchy by nobility, as of late in Oceana (which of all other models before the declination of it came up to the perfection in that kind) it was not in the power or wit of man to cure it of that dangerous flaw, That the nobility had frequent interest and perpetual power by their retainers and tenants to raise sedition; and (wheras the Janizarys occasion this kind of calamity no sooner than they make an end of it) to levy a lasting war, to the vast effusion of blood, and that even upon occasions wherin the people, but for their dependence upon their lords, had no concernment, as in the feud of the Red and White. The like has bin frequent in Spain, France, Germany, and other monarchys of this kind; wherfore monarchy by a nobility is no perfect government.

For the proof of the third assertion; Leviathan yields it to me, that there is no other commonwealth but monarchical or popular: wherfore if no monarchy be a perfect government, then either there is no perfect government, or it must be popular; for which kind of constitution I have something more to say, than Leviathan has said or ever will be able to say for monarchy. As,

First, That it is the government that was never conquer’d by any monarch, from the beginning of the world to this day: for if the commonwealths of Greece came under the yoke of the kings of Macedon, they were first broken by themselves.

Secondly, That it is the government that has frequently led mighty monarchs in triumph.

Thirdly, That it is the government, which, if it has bin seditious, it has not bin so from any imperfection in the kind, but in the particular constitution; which, wherever the like has happen’d, must have bin inequal.

Fourthly, That it is the government, which, if it has bin any thing near equal, was never seditious; or let him shew me what sedition has happen’d in Lacedemon or Venice.

Fifthly, That it is the government, which, attaining to perfect equality, has such a libration in the frame of it, that no man living can shew which way any man or men, in or under it, can contract any such interest or power as should be able to disturb the commonwealth with sedition; wherfore an equal commonwealth is that only which is without flaw, and contains in it the full perfection of government. But to return.

By what has been shewn in reason and experience it may appear, that tho commonwealths in general be governments of the senat proposing, the people resolving, and the magistracy executing; yet som are not so good at these orders as others, thro some impediment or defect in the frame, balance, or capacity of them, according to which they are of divers kinds.

Division of commonwealths.The first division of them is into such as are single, as Israel, Athens, Lacedemon, &c. and such as are by leagues, as those of the Acheans, Etolians, Lycians, Switz, and Hollanders.

The second (being Machiavel’s) is into such as are for preservation, as Lacedemon and Venice, and such as are for increase, as Athens and Rome; in which I can see no more than that the former takes in no more citizens than are necessary for defence, and the latter so many as are capable of increase.

The third division (unseen hitherto) is into equal and inequal, and this is the main point, especially as to domestic peace and tranquillity; for to make a commonwealth inequal, is to divide it into partys, which sets them at perpetual variance, the one party endeavouring to preserve their eminence and inequality, and the other to attain to equality: whence the people of Rome deriv’d their perpetual strife with the nobility and senat. But in an equal commonwealth there can be no more strife than there can be overbalance in equal weights; wherfore the commonwealth of Venice, being that which of all others is the most equal in the constitution, is that wherein there never happen’d any strife between the senat and the people.

An equal commonwealth is such a one as is equal both in the balance or foundation, and in the superstructure; that is to say, in her Agrarian law, and in her rotation.

Equal Agrarian.An equal Agrarian is a perpetual law establishing and preserving the balance of dominion by such a distribution, that no one man or number of men, within the compass of the few of aristocracy, can com to overpower the whole people by their possessions in lands.

As the Agrarian answers to the foundation, so dos rotation to the superstructures.

Rotation.Equalrotation is equal vicissitude in government, or succession to magistracy confer’d for such convenient terms, enjoying equal vacations, as take in the whole body by parts, succeding others, thro the free election or suffrage of the people.

Prolongation of magistracy.The contrary wherunto is prolongation of magistracy, which, trashing the wheel of rotation, destroys the life or natural motion of a commonwealth.

Ballot.The election or suffrage of the people is most free, where it is made or given in such a manner, that it can neither oblige* nor disoblige another; nor thro fear of an enemy, or bashfulness towards a friend, impair a man’s liberty.

Wherfore, says Cicero† , the tablet or ballot of the people of Rome (who gave their votes by throwing tablets or little pieces of wood secretly into urns mark’d for the negative or affirmative) was a welcom constitution to the people, as that which, not impairing the assurance of their brows, increas’d the freedom of their judgment. I have not stood upon a more particular description of this ballot, because that of Venice exemplify’d in the model is of all others the most perfect.

Definition of an equal commonwealth.Anequal commonwealth (by that which has bin said) is a government establish’d upon an equal Agrarian, arising into the superstructures or three orders, the senat debating and proposing, the people resolving, and the magistracy executing by an equal rotation thro the suffrage of the people given by the ballot. For tho rotation may be without the ballot, and the ballot without rotation, yet the ballot not only as to the insuing model includes both, but is by far the most equal way; for which cause under the name of the ballot I shall hereafter understand both that and rotation too.

Now having reason’d the principles of an equal commonwealth, I should com to give an instance of such a one in experience, if I could find it; but if this work be of any value, it lys in that it is the first example of a commonwealth that is perfectly equal. For Venice, tho it coms the nearest, yet is a commonwealth for preservation; and such a one, considering the paucity of citizens taken in, and the number not taken in, is externally unequal: and tho every commonwealth that holds provinces must in that regard be such, yet not to that degree. Nevertheless Venice internally, and for her capacity, is by far the most equal, tho it has not in my judgment arriv’d at the full perfection of equality; both because her laws supplying the defect of an Agrarian, are not so clear nor effectual at the foundation, nor her superstructures by the virtue of her ballot or rotation exactly librated; in regard that thro the paucity of her citizens, her greater magistracys are continually wheel’d thro a few hands, as is confest by Janotti, where he says, that if a gentleman coms once to be Savio di terra ferma, it seldom happens that he fails from thenceforward to be adorn’d with som one of the greater magistracys, as Savi di mare, Savi di terra ferma, Savi Grandi, counsellors, those of the decemvirat or dictatorian council, the aurogatori or censors, which require no vacation or interval. Wherfore if this in Venice, or that in Lacedemon, where the kings were hereditary, and the senators (tho elected by the people) for life, cause no inequality (which is hard to be conceiv’d) in a commonwealth for preservation, or such a one as consists of a few citizens; yet is it manifest, that it would cause a very great one in a commonwealth for increase, or consisting of the many, which, by ingrossing the magistracys in a few hands, would be obstructed in their rotation.

But there be who say (and think it a strong objection) that let a commonwealth be as equal as you can imagin, two or three men when all is don will govern it; and there is that in it, which, notwithstanding the pretended sufficiency of a popular state, amounts to a plain confession of the imbecility of that policy, and of the prerogative of monarchy: for as much as popular governments in difficult cases have had recourse to dictatorian power, as in Rome.

To which I answer, That as truth is a spark to which objections are like bellows, so in this respect our commonwealth shines; for the eminence acquir’d by suffrage of the people in a commonwealth, especially if it be popular and equal, can be ascended by no other steps than the universal acknowledgement of virtue: and where men excel in virtue, the commonwealth is stupid and unjust, if accordingly they do not excel in authority. Wherfore this is both the advantage of virtue, which has her due incouragement, and of the commonwealth, which has her due services. These are the philosophers which Plato would have to be princes, the princes which Solomon would have to be mounted, and their steeds are those of authority, not empire: or, if they be buckl’d to the chariot of empire, as that of the dictatorian power, like the chariot of the sun, it is glorious for terms and vacations, or intervals. And as a commonwealth is a government of laws and not of men, so is this the principality of virtue, and not of man; if that fail or set in one, it rises in another* who is created his immediat successor. And this takes away that vanity from under the sun, which is an error proceding more or less from all other rulers under heaven but an equal commonwealth.

These things consider’d, it will be convenient in this place to speak a word to such as go about to insinuat to the nobility or gentry a fear of the people, or to the people a fear of the nobility or gentry, as if their interests were destructive to each other; when indeed an army may as well consist of soldiers without officers, or of officers without soldiers, as a commonwealth (especially such a one as is capable of greatness) of a people without a gentry, or of a gentry without a people. Wherfore this (tho not always so intended as may appear by Machiavel, who else would be guilty) is a pernicious error. There is somthing first in the making of a commonwealth, then in the governing of it, and last of all in the leading of its armys; which (tho there be great divines, great lawyers, great men in all professions) seems to be peculiar only to the genius of a gentleman. For so it is in the universal series of story, that if any man has founded a commonwealth, he was first a gentleman. Moses had his education by the daughter of Pharaoh; Theseus and Solon, of noble birth, were held by the Athenians worthy to be kings; Lycurgus was of the royal blood; Romulus and Numa princes; Brutus and Publico aPatricians; the Gracchi, that lost their lives for the people of Rome and the restitution of that commonwealth, were the sons of a father adorn’d with two triumphs, and of Cornelia the daughter of Scipio, who being demanded in marriage by King Ptolemy, disdain’d to becom the queen of Egypt. And the most renown’d OLPHAUS MEGALETOR, sole legislator (as you will see anon) of the commonwealth of Oceana, was deriv’d from a noble family: nor will it be any occasion of scruple in this case, that Leviathan affirms the politics to be no antienter than his book de Cive. Such also as have got any fame in the civil government of a commonwealth, or by the leading of its armys, have bin gentlemen; for so in all other respects were those plebeian magistrates elected by the people of Rome, being of known descents, and of equal virtues, except only that they were excluded from the name by the usurpation of the Patricians. Holland, thro this defect at home, has borrow’d princes for generals, and gentlemen of divers nations for commanders: and the Switzers, if they have any defect in this kind, rather lend their people to the colors of other princes, than make that noble use of them at home, which should assert the liberty of mankind. For where there is not a nobility to hearten the people, they are slothful, regardless of the world, and of the public interest of liberty, as even those of Rome had bin without their gentry: wherfore let the people embrace the gentry in peace, as the light of their eys; and in war, as the trophy of their arms; and if Cornelia disdain’d to be queen of Egypt, if a Roman consul look’d down from his tribunal upon the greatest king; let the nobility love and cherish the people that afford them a throne so much higher in a commonwealth in the acknowledgement of their virtue, than the crowns of monarchs.

An inequal: commonwealth.But if the equality of a commonwealth consist in the equality first of the Agrarian, and next of the rotation, then the inequality of a commonwealth must consist in the absence or inequality of the Agrarian, or of the rotation, or of both.

Israel and Lacedemon, which commonwealths (as the people of this, in Josephus, claims kindred of that) have great resemblance, were each of them equal in their Agrarian, and inequal in their rotation; especially Israel, where the sanhedrim or senat, first elected by the people, as appears by the words of Moses,Deut. 1. took upon them ever after, without any precept of God, to substitute their successors by ordination; which having bin there of civil use, as excommunication, community of goods, and other customs of the Esseans, who were many of them converted, came afterward to be introduced into the Christian church. And the election of the judg, suffes or dictator, was irregular, both for the occasion, the term, and the vacation of that magistracy; as you find in the book of Judges, where it is often repeated, That in those days there was no king in Israel, that is, no judg: and in the first of Samuel, where Ely judg’d Israel forty years, and Samuel, all his life. In Lacedemon the election of the senat being by suffrage of the people, tho for life, was not altogether so inequal yet the hereditary right of kings, were it not for the Agrarian, had ruin’d her.

Athens and Rome were inequal as to their Agrarian, that of Athens being infirm, and this of Rome none at all; for if it were more antiently carry’d, it was never observ’d. Whence by the time of Tiberius Gracchus the nobility had almost eaten the people quite out of their lands, which they held in the occupation of tenants and servants: whereupon the remedy being too late, and too vehemently apply’d, that commonwealth was ruin’d.

These also were inequal in their rotation, but in a contrary manner. Athens, in regard that the senat (chosen at once by lot, not by suffrage, and chang’d every year, not in part, but in the whole) consisted not of the natural aristocracy; nor sitting long enough to understand, or to be perfect in their office, had no sufficient authority to restrain the people from that perpetual turbulence in the end, which was their ruin, notwithstanding the efforts of Nicias, who did all a man could do to help it. But as Athens by the headiness of the people, so Rome fell by the ambition of the nobility, thro the want of an equal rotation; which if the people had got into the senat, and timely into the magistracys (whereof the former was always usurp’d by the Patricians, and the latter for the most part) they had both carry’d and held their Agrarian, and that had render’d that commonwealth immovable.

But let a commonwealth be equal or inequal, it must consist, as has bin shewn by reason and all experience, of the three general orders; that is to say, of the senat debating and proposing, of the people resolving, and of the magistracy executing. Wherefore I can never wonder enough at Leviathan, who, without any reason or example, will have it that a commonwealth consists of a single person, or of a single assembly; nor can I sufficiently pity those thousand gentlemen, whose minds, which otherwise would have waver’d, he has fram’d (as is affirm’d by himself) into a conscientious obedience (for so he is pleas’d to call it) of such a government.

But to finish this part of the discourse, which I intend for as complete an epitome of antient prudence, and in that of the whole art of politics, as I am able to frame in so short a time;

The two first orders, that is to say, the senat and the people, are legislative, wherunto answers that part of this science which by politicians is intitl’d*of laws; and the third order is executive, to which answers that part of the same science which is stil’d†of the frame and course of courts or judicatorys. A word to each of these will be necessary.

Of laws.And first for laws, they are either ecclesiastical or civil, such as concern religion or government.

Laws ecclesiastical, or such as concern religion, according to the universal course of antient prudence, are in the power of the magistrat; but according to the common practice of modern prudence, since the papacy, torn out of his hands.

But, as a government pretending to liberty, and yet suppressing liberty of conscience (which, because religion not according to a man’s conscience can to him be none at all, is the main) must be a contradiction; so a man that, pleading for the liberty of private conscience, refuses liberty to the national conscience, must be absurd.

A commonwealth is nothing else but the national conscience. And if the conviction of a man’s privat conscience produces his privat religion, the conviction of the national conscience must produce a national religion. Whether this be well reason’d, as also whether these two may stand together, will best be shewn by the examples of the antient commonwealths taken in their order.

In that of Israel the government of the national religion appertain’d not to the Priests and Levites, otherwise than as they happen’d to be of the sanhedrim or senat, to which they had no right at all but by election.Deut. 17. It is in this capacity therefore that the people are commanded under pain of death to hearken to them, and to do according to the sentence of the law which they should teach; but in Israel the law ecclesiastical and civil was the same, therefore the sanhedrim having the power of one, had the power of both. But as the national religion appertain’d to the jurisdiction of the sanhedrim, so the liberty of conscience appertain’d, from the same date, and by the same right, to the prophets and their disciples; as where it is said, I will raise up a prophet—and whoever will not hearken to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.Deut. 18. 10. The words relate to prophetic right, which was above all the orders of this commonwealth; whence Elijah not only refus’d to obey the king, but destroy’d his messengers with fire.2 Kings 1. And wheras it was not lawful by the national religion to sacrifice in any other place than the temple, a prophet was his own temple, and might sacrifice where he would, as Elijah did in Mount Carmel.1 Kings 18, 19. By this right John the Baptist and our Saviour, to whom it more particularly related, had their disciples, and taught the people; whence is deriv’d our present right of GATHER’D CONGREGATIONS: wherfore the Christian religion grew up according to the orders of the commonwealth of Israel, and not against them. Nor was liberty of conscience infring’d by this government, till the civil liberty of the same was lost, as under Herod, Pilat, and Tiberius, a threepil’d tyranny.

To procede, Athens preserv’d her religion, by the testimony of Paul, with great superstition: if Alcibiades, that atheistical fellow, had not shew’d them a pair of heels, they had shaven off his head for shaving their Mercurys, and making their gods look ridiculously upon them without beards. Nevertheless, if Paul reason’d with them, they lov’d news, for which he was the more weleom; and if he converted Dionysius the Areopagit, that is, one of the senators, there follow’d neither any hurt to him, nor lots of honor to Dionysius. And for Rome, if Cicero, in his most excellent book de natura deorum, overthrew the national religion of that commonwealth, he was never the farther from being consul. But there is a meanness and poorness in modern prudence, not only to the damage of civil government, but of religion it self: for to make a man in matter of religion, which admits not of sensible demonstration (jurare in verba magistri) engage to believe no otherwise than is believ’d by my Lord Bishop, or Goodman Presbyter, is a pedantism, that has made the sword to be a rod in the hands of schoolmasters; by which means, whereas the Christian religion is the farthest of any from countenancing war, there never was a war of religion but since Christianity: for which we are beholden to the Pope; for the Pope not giving liberty of conscience to princes and commonwealths, they cannot give that to their subjects which they have not themselves: whence both princes and subjects, either thro his instigation, or their own disputes, have introduc’d that execrable custom, never known in the world before, of fighting for religion, and denying the magistrat to have any jurisdiction concerning it; wheras the magistrat’s losing the power of religion loses the liberty of conscience, which in that case has nothing to protect it. But if the people be otherwise taught, it concerns them to look about them, and to distinguish between the shrieking of the lapwing, and the voice of the turtle.

To com to civil laws, if they stand one way and the balance another, it is the case of a government which of necessity must be new model’d; wherefore your lawyers advising you upon the like occasions to fit your government to their laws, are no more to be regarded, than your taylor if he should desire you to fit your body to his doublet. There is also danger in the plausible pretence of reforming the law, except the government be first good, in which case it is a good tree, and (trouble not yourselves overmuch) brings not forth evil fruit; otherwise, if the tree be evil, you can never reform the fruit: or if a root that is naught bring forth fruit of this kind that seems to be good, take the more heed, for it is the ranker poison. It was no wise probable, if Augustus had not made excellent laws, that the bowels of Rome could have com to be so miserably eaten out by the tyranny of Tiberius and his successors. The best rule as to your laws in general is, that they be few. Rome by the testimony of Cicero was best govern’d under those of the twelve tables; and by that of Tacitus,Plurimæ leges, corruptissima respublica. You will be told, That where the laws be few, they leave much to arbitrary power; but where they be many, they leave more: the laws in this case, according to Justinian and the best lawyers, being as litigious as the suitors. Solon made few; Lycurgus fewer laws: and commonwealths have the fewest at this day of all other governments.

Of courts.Now to conclude this part with a word de judiciis, or of the constitution or course of courts; it is a discourse not otherwise capable of being well manag’d but by particular examples, both the constitution and course of courts being divers in different governments, but best beyond compare in Venice, where they regard not so much the arbitrary power of their courts, as the constitution of them; wherby that arbitrary power being altogether unable to retard or do hurt to business, produces and must produce the quickest dispatch, and the most righteous dictats of justice that are perhaps in human nature. The manner I shall not stand in this place to describe, because it is exemplify’d at large in the judicature of the people of Oceana. And thus much of antient prudence, and the first branch of this preliminary discourse.

The Second Part of the Preliminarys.

IN the second part I shall endeavor to shew the rise, progress, and declination of modern prudence.

The date of this kind of policy is to be computed, as was shewn, from those inundations of Goths, Vandals, Huns, and Lombards, that overwhelm’d the Roman empire. But as there is no appearance in the bulk or constitution of modern prudence, that it should ever have bin able to com up and grapple with the antient, so somthing of necessity must have interpos’d, wherby this came to be enervated, and that to receive strength and incouragement. And this was the execrable reign of the Roman emperors taking rise from (that fælix scelus) the arms of Cæsar, in which storm the ship of the Roman commonwealth was forc’d to disburden itself of that precious fraight, which never since could emerge or raise its head but in the gulf of Venice.

The transition of antient into modern prudence.It is said in Scripture, Thy evil is of thyself, O Israel! To which answers that of the moralists,*None is hurt but by himself, as also the whole matter of the politics; at present this example of the Romans, who, thro a negligence committed in their Agrarian laws, let in the sink of luxury, and forfeited the inestimable treasure of liberty for themselves and their posterity.

The Agrarian laws of the Romans.Their Agrarian laws were such, wherby their lands ought to have bin divided among the people, either without mention of a colony, in which case they were not oblig’d to change their abode; or with mention and upon condition of a colony, in which case they were to change their abode; and leaving the city, to plant themselves upon the lands so assign’d.Sigonius de Ant. Ro. The lands assign’d, or that ought to have bin assign’d in either of these ways, were of three kinds: such as were taken from the enemy and distributed to the people; or such as were taken from the enemy, and under color of being reserv’d to the public use, were thro stealth possest by the nobility; or such as were bought with the public money to be distributed. Of the laws offer’d in these cases, those which divided the lands taken from the enemy, or purchas’d with the public money, never occasion’d any dispute; but such as drove at dispossessing the nobility of their usurpations, and dividing the common purchase of the sword among the people, were never touch’d but they caus’d earthquakes, nor could they ever be obtain’d by the people; or being obtain’d, be observ’d by the nobility, who not only preserv’d their prey, but growing vastly rich upon it, bought the people by degrees quite out of those shares that had been confer’d upon them. This the Gracchi coming too late to perceive, found the balance of the commonwealth to be lost; but putting the people (when they had least force) by forcible means upon the recovery of it, did ill, seeing it neither could nor did tend to any more than to shew them by worse effects, that what the wisdom of their leaders had discover’d was true. For (quite contrary to what has happen’d in Oceana, where, the balance falling to the people, they have overthrown the nobility) that nobility of Rome, under the conduct of Sylla, overthrew the people and the commonwealth: seeing Sylla first introduc’d that new balance, which was the foundation of the succeding monarchy, in the plantation of military colonys, instituted by his distribution of the conquer’d lands, not now of enemys, but of citizens, to forty-seven legions of his soldiers; so that how he came to be PERPETUAL DICTATOR, or other magistrats to succede him in like power, is no miracle.Military colony.

The balance of the Roman empire.These military colonys (in which manner succeding emperors continu’d, as Augustus by the distribution of the Veterans, wherby he had overcom Brutus and Cassius, to plant their soldiery) consisted of such as I conceive were they that are call’d milites beneficiarii; in regard that the tenure of their lands was by way of benefices, that is, for life, and upon condition of duty or service in the war upon their own charge. These benefices Alexander Severus granted to the heirs of the incumbents, but upon the same conditions. And such was the dominion by which the Roman emperors gave their balance. But to the beneficiarys, as was no less than necessary for the safety of the prince, a matter of eight thousand by the example of Augustus were added, which departed not from his sides, but were his perpetual guard, call’d Pretorian bands; tho these, according to the incurable flaw already observ’d in this kind of government, became the most frequent butchers of their lords that are to be found in story. Thus far the Roman monarchy is much the same with that at this day in Turky, consisting of a camp, and a horse-quarter; a camp in regard of the Spahys and Janizarys, the perpetual guard of the prince, except they also chance to be liquorish after his blood; and a horse-quarter in regard of the distribution of his whole land to tenants for life, upon condition of continual service, or as often as they shall be commanded at their own charge by timars, being a word which they say signifys benefices, that it shall save me a labor of opening the government.

But the fame of Mahomet and his prudence, is especially founded in this, that wheras the Roman monarchy, except that of Israel, was the most imperfect, the Turkish is the most perfect that ever was. Which happen’d in that the Roman (as the Israelitish of the sanhedrim and the congregation) had a mixture of the senat and the people; and the Turkish is pure. And that this was pure, and the other mix’d, happen’d not thro the wisdom of the legislators, but the different genius of the nations; the people of the eastern parts, except the Israelits, which is to be attributed to their agrarian, having bin such as scarce ever knew any other condition than that of slavery; and these of the western having ever had such a relish of liberty, as thro what despair soever could never be brought to stand still while the yoke was putting on their necks, but by being fed with som hopes of reserving to themselves som part of their freedom.

Wherfore Julius Cæsar (saith*Suetonius) contented himself in naming half the magistrats, to leave the rest to the suffrage of the people.Dion. And Mæcenas, tho he would not have Augustus to give the people their liberty, would not have him take it quite away‡ . Whence this empire being neither hawk nor buzzard, made a flight accordingly; and the prince being perpetually tost (having the avarice of the soldiery on this hand to satisfy upon the people, and the senat and the people on the other to be defended from the soldiery) seldom dy’d any other death than by one horn of this dilemma, as is noted more at large by Machiavel.P. cap. 19. But the Pretorian bands, those bestial executioners of their captain’s tyranny upon others, and of their own upon him, having continued from the time of Augustus, were by Constantin the Great (incens’d against them for taking part with his adversary Maxentius) remov’d from their strong garison which they held in Rome, and distributed into divers provinces. The benefices of the soldiers that were hitherto held for life and upon duty, were by this prince made hereditary: so that the whole foundation wherupon this empire was first built being now remov’d, shews plainly, that the emperors must long before this have found out som other way of support; and this was by stipendiating the Goths, a people that, deriving their roots from the northern parts of Germany, or out of Sweden, had (thro their victorys obtain’d against Domitian) long since spred their branches to so near a neighbourhood with the Roman territorys, that they began to overshadow them. For the emperors making use of them in their armys (as the French do at this day of the Switz) gave them that under the notion of a stipend, which they receiv’d as tribute, coming (if there were any default in the payment) so often to distrein for it, that in the time of Honorius they sack’d Rome, and possest themselves of Italy. And such was the transition of antient into modern prudence; or that breach which being follow’d in every part of the Roman empire with inundations of Vandals, Huns, Lombards, Franks, Saxons, overwhelm’d antient languages, learning, prudence, manners, citys, changing the names of rivers, countrys, seas, mountains, and men; Camillus, Cæsar, and Pompey, being com to Edmund, Richard, and Geoffrey.Machiavel.

The Gothic balance.To open the groundwork or balance of these new politicians: Feudum, says Calvin the lawyer, is a Gothic word of divers significations; for it is taken either for war, or for a possession of conquer’d lands, distributed by the victor to such of his captains and soldiers as had merited in his wars, upon condition to acknowledge him to be their perpetual lord, and themselves to be his subjects.

Institution of feudatory principalitys.Of these there were three kinds or orders: the first of nobility, distinguish’d by the titles of dukes, marquisses, earls; and these being gratified with the citys, castles, and villages of the conquer’d Italians, their feuds participated of royal dignity, and were call’d regalia, by which they had right to coin mony, create magistrats, take toll, customs, confiscations, and the like.

Feuds of the second order were such as, with the consent of the king, were bestow’d by these feudatory princes upon men of inferior quality, call’d their barons, on condition that next to the king they should defend the dignitys and fortunes of their lords in arms.

The lowest order of feuds were such as being confer’d by those of the second order upon privat men, whether noble or not noble, oblig’d them in the like duty to their superiors; these were call’d vavasors. And this is the Gothic balance, by which all the kingdoms this day in Christendom were at first erected; for which cause, if I had time, I should open in this place the empire of Germany, and the kingdoms of France, Spain, and Poland: but so much as has bin said being sufficient for the discovery of the principles of modern prudence in general, I shall divide the remainder of my discourse, which is more particular, into three parts.

The first shewing the constitution of the late monarchy of Oceana.

The second, the dissolution of the same. And

The third, the generation of the present commonwealth.

The constitution of the late monarchy of Oceana is to be consider’d in relation to the different nations by whom it has bin successively subdu’d and govern’d. The first of these were the Romans, the second the Teutons, the third the Scandians, and the fourth the Neustrians.

The government of the Romans, who held it as a province, I shall omit, because I am to speak of their provincial government in another place; only it is to be remember’d here, that if we have given over running up and down naked, and with dappl’d hides, learn’d to write and read, and to be instructed with good arts, for all these we are beholden to the Romans, either immediatly, or mediatly by the Teutons: for that the Teutons had the arts from no other hand, is plain enough by their language, which has yet no word to signify either writing or reading, but what is deriv’d from the Latin. Furthermore, by the help of these arts so learn’d, we have bin capable of that religion which we have long since receiv’d; wherfore it seems to me, that we ought not to detract from the memory of the Romans, by whose means we are, as it were, of beasts becom men, and by whose means we might yet of obsoure and ignorant men (if we thought not too well of our selves) becom a wife and a great people.

For the proof of the ensuing discourse out of records and antiquities see Selden’s titles of honor from pag. 593, to pag. 837.TheRomans having govern’d Oceana provincially, the Teutons were the first that introduc’d the form of the late monarchy. To these succeeded the Scandians, of whom (because their reign was short, as also because they made little alteration in the government as to the form) I shall take no notice. But the Teutons going to work upon the Gothic balance, divided the whole nation into three sorts of feuds, that of ealdorman, that of kings thane, and that of middle thane.

The Teuton monarchy.When the kingdom was first divided into precincts will be as hard to shew, as when it began first to be govern’d; it being impossible that there should be any government without som division. The division that was in use with the Teutons, was by countys, and every county had either its ealdorman, or high reeve. The title of ealdorman came in time to eorl, or erl, and that of high reeve to high sheriff.

Earls.Earl of the shire or county denoted the king’s thane, or tenant by grand serjeantry or knights service, in chief or in capite; his possessions were somtimes the whole territory from whence he had his denomination, that is, the whole county, somtimes more than one county, and somtimes less, the remaining part being in the crown. He had also somtimes a third, or som other customary part of the profits of certain citys, boroughs, or other places within his earldom. For an example of the possessions of earls in antient times, Ethelred had to him and his heirs the whole kingdom of Mercia, containing three or four countys; and there were others that had little less.

King’s thane.King’sthane was also an honorary title, to which he was qualify’d that had five hides of land held immediatly of the king by service of personal attendance; insomuch that if a churl or countryman had thriven to this proportion, having a church, a kitchen, a belhouse (that is, a hall with a bell in it to call his family to dinner) a boroughgate with a seat (that is, a porch) of his own, and any distinct office in the king’s court, then was he the king’s thane. But the proportion of a hide land, otherwise call’d caruca, or a plow land, is difficult to be understood, because it was not certain; nevertheless it is generally conceiv’d to be so much as may be manag’d with one plow, and would yield the maintenance of the same, with the appurtenances in all kinds.

Middle thane.Themiddle thane was feudal, but not honorary; he was also call’d a vavasor, and his lands a vavasory, which held of som mesn lord, and not immediatly of the king.

Possessions and their tenures, being of this nature, shew the balance of the Teuton monarchy; wherin the riches of earls were so vast, that to arise from the balance of their dominion to their power, they were not only call’d reguli or little kings, but were such indeed; their jurisdiction being of two sorts, either that which was exercis’d by them in the court of their countrys, or in the high court of the kingdom.

Shiremoot.In the territory denominating an earl, if it were all his own, the courts held, and the profits of that jurisdiction were to his own use and benefit. But if he had but som part of his county, then his jurisdiction and courts (saving perhaps in those possessions that were his own) were held by him to the king’s use and benefit; that is, he commonly supply’d the office which the sheriffs regularly executed in countys that had no earls, and whence they came to be call’d viscounts.Viscounts. The court of the county that had an earl was held by the earl and the bishop of the diocess, after the manner of the sheriffs turns to this day; by which means both the ecclesiastical and temporal laws were given in charge together to the country. The causes of vavasors or vavasorys appertain’d to the cognizance of this court, where wills were prov’d, judgment and execution given, cases criminal and civil determin’d.

Halymoot.The king’s thanes had the like jurisdiction in their thane lands, as lords in their manors, where they also kept courts.

Besides these in particular, both the earls and king’s thanes, together with the bishops, abbots, and vavasors, or middle thanes, had in the high court or parlament in the kingdom, a more public jurisdiction, consisting first of deliberative power for advising upon, and assenting to new laws: secondly, of giving counsil in matters of state: and thirdly, of judicature upon suits and complaints.Weidenagemoots. I shall not omit to inlighten the obscurity of these times (in which there is little to be found of a methodical constitution of this high court) by the addition of an argument, which I conceive to bear a strong testimony to it self, tho taken out of a late writing that conceals the author. “It is well known, says he, that in every quarter of the realm a great many boroughs do yet send burgesses to the parlament, which nevertheless be so antiently and so long since decay’d and gon to nought, that they cannot be shew’d to have bin of any reputation since the conquest, much less to have obtain’d any such privilege by the grant of any succeding king: wherfore these must have had this right by more antient usage, and before the conquest, they being inable now to shew whence they deriv’d it.”

This argument (tho there be more) I shall pitch upon as sufficient to prove; first, that the lower sort of the people had right to session in parlament during the time of the Teutons. Secondly, that they were qualify’d to the same by election in their boroughs, and, if knights of the shire (as no doubt they are) be as antient in the countrys. Thirdly, if it be a good argument to say, that the commons during the reign of the Teutons were elected into parlament, because they are so now, and no man can shew when this custom began; I see not which way it should be an ill one to say, that the commons during the reign of the Teutons constituted also a distinct house, because they do so now; unless any man can shew that they did ever sit in the same house with the lords. Wherfore to conclud this part, I conceive for these, and other reasons to be mention’d hereafter, that the parlament of the Teutons consisted of the king, the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons of the nation, notwithstanding the stile of divers acts of parlament, which runs as that of magna charta in the king’s name only, seeing the same was nevertheless enacted by the king, peers, and commons of the land, as is testify’d in those words by a subsequent act.25 Edw. 3. c. 1.

Monarchy of the Neustrians.The monarchy of the Teutons had stood in this posture about two hundred and twenty years; when Turbo duke of Neustria making his claim to the crown of one of their kings that dy’d childless, follow’d it with successful arms; and being possest of the kingdom, us’d it as conquer’d, distributing the earldoms, thane lands, bishoprics and prelacys of the whole realm among his Neustrians. From this time the earl came to be call’d comes, consul, and dux (tho consul and dux grew afterward out of use) the king’s thanes came to be call’d barons, and their lands baronys; the middle thane holding still of a mean lord, retain’d the name of vavasor.

Their earls.Theearl or comes continu’d to have the third part of the pleas of the county paid to him by the sheriff or vice-comes, now a distinct officer in every county depending upon the king; saving that such earls as had their countys to their own use, were now counts palatin, and had under the king regal jurisdiction; insomuch that they constituted their own sheriffs, granted pardons, and issu’d writs in their own names; nor did the king’s writ of ordinary justice run in their dominions till a late statute, wherby much of this privilege was taken away.27 H. 8.

Their barons.Forbarons they came from henceforth to be in different times of three kinds; barons by their estates and tenures, barons by writ, and barons created by letters patent. From Turbo the first to Adoxus the seventh king from the conquest, barons had their denomination from their possessions and tenures. And these were either spiritual or temporal; for not only the thane lands, but the possessions of bishops, as also of som twenty-six abbats, and two priors, were now erected into baronys, whence the lords spiritual that had suffrage in the Teuton parlament as spiritual lords, came to have it in the Neustrian parlament as barons, and were made subject (which they had not formerly bin) to knights service in chief.Barons by their possessions.Barony coming henceforth to signify all honorary possessions as well of earls as barons, and baronage to denote all kinds of lords as well spiritual as temporal having right to sit in parlament, the baronys in this sense were somtimes more, and somtimes fewer, but commonly about 200 or 250, containing in them a matter of sixty thousand feuda militum, or knights fees, wherof some twenty-eight thousand were in the clergy. It is ill luck that no man can tell what the land of a knight’s fee (reckon’d in som writs at 40 l. a year, and in others at 10) was certainly worth; for by such a help we might have exactly demonstrated the balance of this government.Coke 11 inst. pag. 596. But, says Coke, it contain’d twelve plow lands, and that was thought to be the most certain account. But this again is extremely uncertain; for one plow out of som land that was fruitful, might work more than ten out of som other that was barren.Balance of the Neustrian monarchy. Nevertheless, seeing it appears by Bracton, that of earldoms and baronys it was wont to be said, that the whole kingdom was compos’d; as also, that these consisting of 60,000 knights fees, furnish’d 60,000 men for the king’s service, being the whole militia of this monarchy, it cannot be imagin’d that the vavasorys or freeholds in the people amounted to any considerable proportion. Wherfore the balance and foundation of this government was in the 60,000 knights fees, and these being possest by the 250 lords, it was a government of the few, or of the nobility; wherin the people might also assemble, but could have no more than a mere name. And the clergy holding a third of the whole nation, as is plain by the parlament roll; it is an absurdity (seeing the clergy of France came first thro their riches to be a state of that kingdom) to acknowlege the people to have bin a state of this realm, and not to allow it to the clergy,4 Rich. 2. who were so much more weighty in the balance, which is that of all other whence a state or order in a government is denominated.Numb. 13. Wherfore this monarchy consisted of the king, and of the three (ordines regni, or) estates, the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons: it consisted of these I say as to the balance, tho during the reign of som of these kings, not as to the administration.

Administration of the Neustrian monarchy during the reign of the first kings.For the ambition of Turbo, and som of those that more immediately succeded him, to be absolute princes, strove against the nature of their foundation, and, inasmuch as he had divided almost the whole realm among his Neustrians, with som incouragement for a while. But the Neustrians while they were but foren plants, having no security against the natives, but in growing up by their princes sides, were no sooner well rooted in their vast dominions, than they came up according to the infallible consequence of the balance domestic, and, contracting the national interest of the baronage, grew as fierce in the vindication of the antient rights and liberties of the same, as if they had bin always natives: whence, the kings being as obstinat on the one side for their absolute power, as these on the other for their immunitys, grew certain wars which took their denomination from the barons.

This fire about the middle of the reign of Adoxus began to break out.Barons by writ. And wheras the predecessors of this king had divers times bin forc’d to summon councils resembling those of the Teutons, to which the lords only that were barons by dominion and tenure had hitherto repair’d, Adoxus seeing the effects of such dominion, began first not to call such as were barons by writ (for that was according to the practice of antient times) but to call such by writs as were otherwise no barons; by which means striving to avoid the consequence of the balance, in coming unwillingly to set the government streight, he was the first that set it awry. For the barons in his reign, and his successors, having vindicated their antient authority, restor’d the parlament with all the rights and privileges of the same, saving that from thenceforth the kings had found out a way wherby to help themselves against the mighty, by creatures of their own, and such as had no other support but by their favor. By which means this government, being indeed the masterpiece of modern prudence, has bin cry’d up to the skys, as the only invention wherby at once to maintain the soverainty of a prince, and the liberty of the people. Wheras indeed it has bin no other than a wrestling match, wherin the nobility, as they have bin stronger, have thrown the king; or the king, if he has bin stronger, has thrown the nobility; or the king, where he has had a nobility, and could bring them to his party, has thrown the people, as in France and Spain; or the people where they have had no nobility, or could get them to be of their party, have thrown the king, as in Holland, and of later times in Oceana.49 H. 3. But they came not to this strength but by such approaches and degrees, as remain to be further open’d. For wheras the barons by writ (as the sixty-four abbats, and thirty-six priors that were so call’d) were but pro tempore,Dicotome being the twelfth king from the conquest, began to make barons by letters patent, with the addition of honorary pensions for the maintenance of their dignitys to them and their heirs; so that they were hands in the king’s purse, and had no shoulders for his throne.Barons by letters patent. Of these when the house of peers came once to be full, as will be seen hereafter, there was nothing more empty. But for the present, the throne having other supports, they did not hurt that so much as they did the king: for the old barons taking Dicotome’s prodigality to such creatures so ill, that they depos’d him, got the trick of it, and never gave over setting up and pulling down their kings according to their various interests, and that faction of the white and red, into which they have bin thenceforth divided, till Panurgus the eighteenth king from the conquest, was more by their favor than his right advanc’d to the crown.Dissolution of the late monarchy of Oceana. This king thro his natural subtilty reflecting at once upon the greatness of their power, and the inconstancy of their favor, began to find another flaw in this kind of government, which is also noted by Machiavel, namely that a throne supported by a nobility, is not so hard to be ascended, as kept warm. Wherfore his secret jealousy, lest the dissension of the nobility, as it brought him in, might throw him out, made him travel in ways undiscover’d by them, to ends as little foreseen by himself: while to establish his own safety, he by mixing water with their wine, first began to open those sluces that have since overwhelm’d not the king only, but the throne. For wheras a nobility strikes not at the throne without which they cannot subsist, but at som king that they do not like; popular power strikes thro the king at the throne, as that which is incompatible with it. Now that Panurgus in abating the power of the nobility, was the cause whence it came to fall into the hands of the people, appears by those several statutes that were made in his reign, as that for population, those against retainers, and that for alienations.

By the statute of population, all houses of husbandry that were us’d with twenty acres of ground and upwards, were to be maintain’d, and kept up for ever with a competent proportion of land laid to them, and in no wise, as appears by a subsequent statute, to be sever’d. By which means the houses being kept up, did of necessity inforce dwellers; and the proportion of land to be till’d being kept up, did of necessity inforce the dweller not to be a begger or cottager, but a man of som substance, that might keep hinds and servants, and set the plow a going. This did mightily concern (says the historian of that prince) the might and manhood of the kingdom, and in effect amortize a great part of the lands to the hold and possession of the yeomanry or middle people, who living not in a servil or indigent fashion, were much unlink’d from dependence upon their lords, and living in a free and plentiful manner, became a more excellent infantry; but such a one upon which the lords had so little power, that from henceforth they may be computed to have bin disarm’d.

And as they lost their infantry after this manner, so their cavalry and commanders were cut off by the statute of retainers: for wheras it was the custom of the nobility to have younger brothers of good houses, metal’d fellows, and such as were knowing in the feats of arms about them; they who were longer follow’d with so dangerous a train, escap’d not such punishments, as made them take up.

Henceforth the country-lives, and great tables of the nobility, which no longer nourish’d veins that would bleed for them, were fruitless and loathsom till they chang’d the air, and of princes became courtiers; where their revenues, never to have bin exhausted by beef and mutton, were found narrow, whence follow’d racking of rents, and at length sale of lands: the riddance thro the statute of alienations being render’d far more quick and facil than formerly it had bin thro the new invention of intails.

To this it happen’d, that Coraunus the successor of that king dissolving the abbys, brought with the declining state of the nobility so vast a prey to the industry of the people, that the balance of the commonwealth was too apparently in the popular party, to be unseen by the wise council of queen Parthenia, who converting her reign thro the perpetual lovetricks that past between her and her people into a kind of romance, wholly neglected the nobility. And by these degrees came the house of commons to raise that head, which since has bin so high and formidable to their princes, that they have look’d pale upon those assemblys. Nor was there any thing now wanting to the destruction of the throne, but that the people, not apt to see their own strength, should be put to feel it; when a prince, as stiff in disputes as the nerve of monarchy was grown slack, receiv’d that unhappy incouragement from his clergy which became his utter ruin, while trusting more to their logic than the rough philosophy of his parlament, it came to an irreparable breach; for the house of peers, which alone had stood in this gap, now sinking down between the king and the commons, shew’d that Crassus was dead, and the isthmus broken. But a monarchy devested of its nobility, has no refuge under heaven but an army. Wherfore the dissolution of this government caus’d the war, not the war the dissolution of this government.

Of the king’s success with his arms it is not necessary to give any further account, than that they prov’d as ineffectual as his nobility; but without a nobility or an army (as has bin shew’d) there can be no monarchy. Wherfore what is there in nature that can arise out of these ashes, but a popular government, or a new monarchy to be erected by the victorious army?

To erect a monarchy, be it never so new, unless like Leviathan you can hang it, as the country-fellow speaks, by geometry, (for what else is it to say, that every other man must give up his will to the will of this one man without any other foundation?) it must stand upon old principles, that is, upon a nobility or an army planted on a due balance of dominion. Aut viam inveniam aut faciam, was an adage of Cæsar; and there is no standing for a monarchy unless it finds this balance, or makes it. If it finds it, the work’s don to its hand: for, where there is inequality of estates, there must be inequality of power; and where there is inequality of power, there can be no commonwealth. To make it, the sword must extirpat out of dominion all other roots of power, and plant an army upon that ground. An army may be planted nationally or provincially. To plant it nationally, it must be in one of the four ways mention’d, that is, either monarchically in part, as the Roman beneficiarii; or monarchically, in the whole, as the Turkish timariots; aristocatrically, that is, by earls and barons, as the Neustrians were planted by Turbo; or democratically, that is, by equal lots, as the Israelitish army in the land of Canaan by Joshua. In every one of these ways there must not only be confiscations, but confiscations to such a proportion as may answer to the work intended.

Confiscation of a people that never fought against you, but whose arms you have born, and in which you have bin victorious, and this upon premeditation, and in cold blood, I should have thought to be against any example in human nature, but for those alleg’d by Machiavel of Agathocles, and Oliverettodi Fermo: the former wherof being captain general of the Syracusans, upon a day assembl’d the senat and the people, as if he had somthing to communicat with them, when at a sign given he cut the senators in pieces to a man, and all the richest of the people, by which means he came to be king. The proceedings of Oliveretto in making himself prince of Fermo, were somwhat different in circumstances, but of the same nature. Nevertheless Catilin, who had a spirit equal to any of these in his intended mischief, could never bring the like to pass in Rome. The head of a small commonwealth, such a one as was that of Syracusa or Fermo, is easily brought to the block; but that a populous nation, such as Rome, had not such a one, was the grief of Nero. If Sylvia or Cæsar attain’d to be princes, it was by civil war, and such civil war as yielded rich spoils, there being a vast nobility to be confiscated; which also was the case in Oceana, when it yielded earth by earldoms and baronys to the Neustrian, for the plantation of his new potentates. Where a conqueror finds the riches of a land in the hands of the few, the forfeitures are easy, and amount to vast advantage; but where the people have equal shares, the confiscation of many coms to little, and is not only dangerous, but fruitless.

TheRomans in one of their defeats of the Volsci found among the captives certain Tusculans, who, upon examination, confest that the arms they bore were by command of their state; wherupon information being given to the senat by the general Camillus, he was forthwith commanded to march against Tusculum; which doing accordingly, he found the Tusculan fields full of husbandmen, that stir’d not otherwise from the plow, than to furnish his army with all kind of accommodations and victuals: drawing near to the city, he saw the gates wide open, the magistrats coming out in their gowns to salute and bid him welcom: entring, the shops were all at work, and open; the streets sounded with the noise of schoolboys at their books; there was no face of war. Whereupon Camillus causing the senat to assemble, told them, That tho the art was understood, yet had they at length found out the true arms wherby the Romans were most undoubtedly to be conquer’d, for which cause he would not anticipat the senat, to which he desir’d them forthwith to send, which they did accordingly; and their dictator with the rest of their embassadors being found by the Roman senators as they went into the house standing sadly at the door, were sent for in as friends, and not as enemys: where the dictator having said, If we have offended, the fault was not so great as is our penitence and your virtue; the senat gave them peace forthwith, and soon after made the Tusculans citizens of Rome.

But putting the case, of which the world is not able to shew an example, that the forfeiture of a populous nation, not conquer’d, but friends, and in cool blood, might be taken; your army must be planted in one of the ways mention’d. To plant it in the way of absolute monarchy, that is, upon feuds for life, such as the Timars, a country as large and fruitful as that of Greece, would afford you but sixteen thousand Timariots, for that is the most the Turc (being the best husband that ever was of this kind) makes of it at this day: and if Oceana, which is less in fruitfulness by one half, and in extent by three parts, should have no greater a force, whoever breaks her in one battel, may be sure she shall never rise; for such (as was noted by Machiavel) is the nature of the Turkish monarchy, if you break it in two battels, you have destroy’d its whole militia; and the rest being all slaves, you hold it without any further resistance. Wherfore the erection of an absolute monarchy in Oceana, or in any other country that is no larger, without making it a certain prey to the first invader, is altogether impossible.

To plant by halves, as the Roman emperors did their beneficiarys, or military colonys, it must be either for life; and this an army of Oceaners in their own country (especially having estates of inheritance) will never bear; because such an army so planted is as well confiscated as the people; nor had the Mamalucs bin contented with such usage in Egypt, but that they were foreners, and daring not to mix with the natives, it was of absolute necessity to their being.

Or planting them upon inheritance, whether aristocratically as the Neustrians, or democratically as the Israelits, they grow up by certain consequence into the national interest: and this, if they be planted popularly, coms to a commonwealth; if by way of nobility, to a mix’d monarchy, which of all other will be found to be the only kind of monarchy, wherof this nation, or any other that is of no greater extent, has bin or can be capable: for if the Israelits (tho their democratical balance, being fix’d by their agrarian, stood firm) be yet found to have elected kings, it was because, their territory lying open, they were perpetually invaded, and being perpetually invaded, turn’d themselves to any thing which thro the want of experience they thought might be a remedy; whence their mistake in election of their kings (under whom they gain’d nothing, but on the contrary lost all they had acquir’d by their commonwealth, both estates and libertys) is not only apparent, but without parallel. And if there have bin (as was shewn) a kingdom of the Goths in Spain, and of the Vandals in Asia, consisting of a single person and a parlament (taking a parlament to be a council of the people only, without a nobility) it is expresly said of those councils, that they depos’d their kings as often as they pleas’d: nor can there be any other consequence of such a government, seeing where there is a council of the people, they do never receive laws, but give them; and a council giving laws to a single person, he has no means in the world wherby to be any more than a subordinat magistrat, but force: in which case he is not a single person and a parlament, but a single person and an army, which army again must be planted as has bin shewn, or can be of no long continuance.

It is true, that the provincial balance being in nature quite contrary to the national, you are no way to plant a provincial army upon dominion. But then you must have a native territory in strength, situation, or government, able to overbalance the foren, or you can never hold it. That an army should in any other case be long supported by a mere tax, is a mere phansy as void of all reason and experience, as if a man should think to maintain such a one by robbing of orchards: for a mere tax is but pulling of plumtrees, the roots wherof are in others mens grounds, who suffering perpetual violence, com to hate the author of it: and it is a maxim, that no prince that is hated by his people can be safe. Arms planted upon dominion extirpat enemys, and make friends: but maintain’d by a mere tax, have enemys that have roots, and friends that have none.

To conclude, Oceana, or any other nation of no greater extent, must have a competent nobility, or is altogether incapable of monarchy: for where there is equality of estates, there must be equality of power: and where there is equality of power, there can be no monarchy.

The generation of the commonwealth.To com then to the generation of the commonwealth; it has bin shewn how thro the ways and means us’d by Panurgus to abase the nobility, and so to mend that flaw which we have asserted to be incurable in this kind of constitution, he suffer’d the balance to fall into the power of the people, and so broke the government: but the balance being in the people, the commonwealth (tho they do not see it) is already in the nature of* them. There wants nothing else but time (which is slow and dangerous) or art (which would be more quick and secure) for the bringing those native arms (wherwithal they are found already) to resist they know not how every thing that opposes them, to such maturity as may fix them upon their own strength and bottom.

What prudence is.But wheras this art is prudence; and that part of prudence which regards the present work, is nothing else but the skill of raising such superstructures of government, as are natural to the known foundations: they never mind the foundation, but thro certain animosities (wherwith by striving one against another they are infected) or thro freaks, by which, not regarding the course of things, nor how they conduce to their purpose, they are given to building in the air, com to be divided and subdivided into endless partys and factions, both civil and ecclesiastical: which briefly to open, I shall first speak of the people in general, and then of their divisions.

A People (says Machiavel) that is corrupt, is not capable of a commonwealth. But in shewing what a corrupt people is, he has either involv’d himself, or me; nor can I otherwise com out of the labyrinth, than by saying, the balance altering a people, as to the foregoing government, must of necessity be corrupt: but corruption in this sense signifys no more than that the corruption of one government (as in natural bodys) is the generation of another. Wherfore if the balance alters from monarchy, the corruption of the people in this case is that which makes them capable of a commonwealth. But wheras I am not ignorant, that the corruption which he means is in manners, this also is from the balance. For the balance leading from monarchical into popular, abates the luxury of the nobility, and, inriching the people, brings the government from a more privat to a more public interest; which coming nearer, as has bin shewn, to justice and right reason, the people upon a like alteration is so far from such a corruption of manners, as should render them incapable of a commonwealth, that of necessity they must therby contract such a reformation of manners as will bear no other kind of government. On the other side, where the balance changes from popular to oligarchical or monarchical, the public interest, with the reason and justice included in the same, becoms more privat; luxury is introduc’d in the room of temperance, and servitude in that of freedom; which causes such a corruption of manners both in the nobility and people, as, by the example of Rome in the time of the Triumvirs, is more at large discover’d by the author to have bin altogether incapable of a commonwealth.

But the balance of Oceana changing quite contrary to that of Rome, the manners of the people were not therby corrupted, but on the contrary adapted to a commonwealth. For differences of opinion in a people not rightly inform’d of their balance, or a division into partys (while there is not any common ligament of power sufficient to reconcile or hold them) is no sufficient proof of corruption. Nevertheless, seeing this must needs be matter of scandal and danger, it will not be amiss, in shewing what were the partys, to shew what were their errors.

The partys into which this nation was divided, were temporal, or spiritual: and the temporal partys were especially two, the one royalists, the other republicans: each of which asserted their different causes, either out of prudence or ignorance, out of interest or conscience.

For prudence, either that of the antients is inferior to the modern (which we have hitherto bin setting face to face, that any one may judg) or that of the royalist must be inferior to that of the commonwealthsman.The royalist. And for interest, taking the commonwealthsman to have really intended the public (for otherwise he is a hypocrit and the worst of men) that of the royalist must of necessity have bin more privat. Wherfore the whole dispute will com upon matter of conscience: and this, whether it be urg’d by the right of kings, the obligation of former laws, or of the oath of allegiance, is absolv’d by the balance.

For if the right of kings were as immediatly deriv’d from the breath of God as the life of man, yet this excludes not death and dissolution. But, that the dissolution of the late monarchy was as natural as the death of a man, has bin already shewn. Wherfore it remains with the royalists to discover by what reason or experience it is possible for a monarchy to stand upon a popular balance; or, the balance being popular, as well the oath of allegiance, as all other monarchical laws, imply an impossibility, and are therfore void.

The commonwealthsman.To the commonwealthsman I have no more to say, but that if he excludes any party, he is not truly such; nor shall ever found a commonwealth upon the natural principle of the same, which is justice. And the royalist for having not oppos’d a commonwealth in Oceana (where the laws were so ambiguous that they might be eternally disputed, and never reconcil’d) can neither be justly for that cause excluded from his full and equal share in the government; nor prudently, for this reason, that a commonwealth consisting of a party will be in perpetual labor of her own destruction: whence it was that the Romans having conquer’d the Albans, incorporated them with equal right into the commonwealth. And if the royalists be flesh of your flesh, and nearer of blood than were the Albans to the Romans, you being also both Christians, the argument’s the stronger. Nevertheless there is no reason that a commonwealth should any more favor a party remaining in fix’d opposition against it, than Brutus did his own sons. But if it fixes them upon that opposition, it is its own fault, not theirs; and this is done by excluding them. Men that have equal possessions, and the same security for their estates and their libertys that you have, have the same cause with you to defend both: but if you will be trampling, they fight for liberty, tho for monarchy; and you for tyranny, tho under the name of a commonwealth: the nature of orders in a government rightly instituted being void of all jealousy, because, let the partys which it imbraces be what they will, its orders are such as they neither would resist if they could, nor could if they would, as has bin partly already shewn, and will appear more at large by the following model

Religious partys.The partys that are spiritual are of more kinds than I need mention; some for a national religion, and others for liberty of conscience, with such animosity on both sides, as if these two could not consist together, and of which I have already sufficiently spoken, to shew, that indeed the one cannot well subsist without the other. But they of all the rest are the most dangerous, who, holding that the saints must govern, go about to reduce the commonwealth to a party, as well for the reasons already shewn, as that their pretences are against Scripture, where the saints are commanded to submit to the higher powers, and to be subject to the ordinance of man. And that men, pretending under the notion of saints or religion to civil power, have hitherto never fail’d to dishonor that profession, the world is full of examples, whereof I shall confine myself at present only to a couple, the one of old, the other of new Rome.

In old Rome the patricians or nobility pretending to be the godly party, were question’d by the people for ingrossing all the magistracys of that commonwealth, and had nothing to say why they did so, but* that magistracy requir’d a kind of holiness which was not in the people† : at which the people were fill’d with such indignation as had com to cutting of throats, if the nobility had not immediatly laid by the insolency of that plea; which nevertheless when they had don, the people for a long time after continu’d to elect no other but patrician magistrats.

The example of new Rome in the rise and practise of the hierarchy (too well known to require any further illustration) is far more immodest.

This has bin the course of nature: and when it has pleas’d or shall please God to introduce any thing that is above the course of nature, he will, as he has always don, confirm it by miracle; for so in his prophecy of the reign of Christ upon earth, he expressly promises: seeing that the souls of them that were beheaded forJesus,shall be seen to live and reign with him; which will be an object of sense, the rather, because the rest of the dead are not to live again till the thousand years be finish’d. And it is not lawful for men to persuade us that a thing already is, tho there be no such object of our sense, which God has told us shall not be till it be an object of our sense.

The saintship of a people as to government, consists in the election of magistrats fearing God, and hating covetousness, and not in their confining themselves, or being confin’d to men of this or that party or profession. It consists in making the most prudent and religious choice they can; yet not in trusting to men, but, next God, to their own orders. Give us good men, and they will make us good laws, is the maxim of a demagog, and is (thro the alteration which is commonly perceivable in men, when they have power to work their own wills) exceeding fallible. But give us good orders, and they will make us good men, is the maxim of a legislator, and the most infallible in the politics.

But these divisions (however there be some good men that look sadly on them) are trivial things; first as to the civil concern, because the government, wherof this nation is capable, being once seen, takes in all interests. And, secondly, as to the spiritual; because as the pretence of religion has always bin turbulent in broken governments, so where the government has bin sound and steddy, religion has never shew’d it self with any other face than that of the natural sweetness and tranquillity: nor is there any reason why it should; wherfore the errors of the people are occasion’d by their governors.The errors of the people are from their governors. If they be doubtful of the way, or wander from it, it is because their guides misled them; and the guides of the people are never so well qualify’d for leading by any virtue of their own, as by that of the government.

The government of Oceana (as it stood at the time wherof we discourse, consisting of one single council of the people, exclusively of the king and the lords) was call’d a parlament: nevertheless the parlaments of the Teutons and of the Neustrians consisted, as has bin shewn, of the king, lords and commons; wherfore this under an old name was a new thing: a parlament consisting of a single assembly elected by the people, and invested with the whole power of the government, without any covenants, conditions, or orders whatsoever. So new a thing, that neither antient nor modern prudence can shew any avow’d example of the like. And there is scarce any thing that seems to me so strange as that (wheras there was nothing more familiar with these counsillors, than to bring the Scripture to the house) there should not be a man of them that so much as offer’d to bring the house to the Scripture, wherin, as has bin shewn, is contain’d that original, wherof all the rest of the commonwealths seem to be copys. Certainly if Leviathan (who is surer of nothing than that a popular commonwealth consists but of one council) transcrib’d his doctrin out of this assembly, for him to except against Aristotle and Cicero for writing out of their own commonwealths, was not so fair play; or if the parlament transcrib’d out of him, it had been an honor better due to Moses. But where one of them should have an example but from the other, I cannot imagin, there being nothing of this kind that I can find in story, but the oligarchy of Athens, the thirty tyrants of the same, and the Roman decemvirs.

Lib. 8.For the oligarchy, Thucydides tells us, that it was a senat or council of four hundred, pretending to a balancing council of the people consisting of five thousand, but not producing them; wherin you have the definition of an oligarchy, which is a single council both debating and resolving, dividing and chusing; and what that must com to, was shewn by the example of the girls, and is apparent by the experience of all times: wherfore the thirty set up by the Lacedemonians (when they had conquer’d Athens) are call’d tyrants by all authors, Leviathan only excepted, who will have them against all the world to have bin an aristocracy; but for what reason I cannot imagin, these also, as void of any balance, having been void of that which is essential to every commonwealth, whether aristocratical or popular; except he be pleas’d with them, because that, according to the testimony of Xenophon, they kill’d more men in eight months, than the Lacedemonians had don in ten years; oppressing the people (to use Sir Walter Raleigh’s words) with all base and intolerable slavery.

The usurp’d government of the decemvirs in Rome was of the same kind. Wherfore in the fear of God let Christian legislators (setting the pattern given in the mount on the one side, and these execrable examples on the other) know the right hand from the left; and so much the rather, because those things which do not conduce to the good of the govern’d, are fallacious, if they appear to be good for the governors. God, in chastising a people, is accustom’d to burn his rod. The empire of these oligarchys was not so violent as short, nor did they fall upon the people, but in their own immediat ruin. A council without a balance is not a commonwealth, but an oligarchy; and every oligarchy, except it be put to the defence of its wickedness or power against som outward danger, is factious. Wherfore the errors of the people being from their governors (which maxim in the politics bearing a sufficient testimony to it self, is also prov’d by Machiavel) if the people of Oceana have bin factious, the cause is apparent: but what remedy?

The generalsIn answer to this question, I com now to the army; of which the most victorious captain, and incomparable patriot, Olphaus Megaletor, was now general: who being a much greater master of that art wherof I have made a rough draught in these preliminarys, had such sad reflections upon the ways and procedings of the parlament, as cast him upon books, and all other means of diversion, among which he happen’d on this place of Machiavel: “Thrice happy is that people which chances to have a man able to give them such a government at once, as without alteration may secure them of their libertys; seeing it was certain that Lacedemon, in observing the laws of Lycurgus, continu’d about eight hundred years without any dangerous tumult or corruption.” My Lord General (as it is said of Themistocles, that he could not sleep for the glory obtain’d by Miltiades at the battel of Maratho) took so new and deep an impression at these words of the much greater glory of Lycurgus, that, being on this side assaulted with the emulation of his illustrious object, and on the other with the misery of the nation, which seem’d (as it were ruin’d by his victory) to cast itself at his feet, he was almost wholly depriv’d of his natural rest, till the debate he had within himself came to a firm resolution, that the greatest advantages of a commonwealth are, first, that the legislator should be one man: and, secondly, that the government should be made all together, or at once.Des. B. 1. c. 9. For the first, It is certain, says Machiavel, that a commonwealth is seldom or never well turn’d or constituted, except it has bin the work of one man; for which cause a wise legislator, and one whose mind is firmly set, not upon privat but the public interest, not upon his posterity but upon his country, may justly endeavour to get the soverain power into his own hands; nor shall any man that is master of reason blame such extraordinary means as in that case will be necessary, the end proving no other than the constitution of a well-order’d commonwealth.That a legislator is to be one. The reason of this is demonstrable: for the ordinary means not failing, the commonwealth has no need of a legislator; but the ordinary means failing, there is no recourse to be had but to such as are extraordinary. And, wheras a book or a building has not bin known to attain to its perfection, if it has not had a sole author or architect; a commonwealth, as to the fabric of it, is of the like nature.That a commonwealth is to be made at once. And thus it may be made at once; in which there be great advantages: for a commonwealth made at once, takes security at the same time it lends mony; and trusts not itself to the faith of men, but lanches immediatly forth into the empire of laws: and being set streight, brings the manners of its citizens to its rule; whence follow’d that uprightness which was in Lacedemon. But manners that are rooted in men, bow the tenderness of a commonwealth coming up by twigs to their bent; whence follow’d the obliquity that was in Rome, and those perpetual repairs by the consuls axes, and tribuns hammers, which could never finish that commonwealth but in destruction.

My Lord General being clear in these points, and of the necessity of som other course than would be thought upon by the parlament, appointed a meeting of the army, where he spoke his sense agreable to these preliminarys with such success to the soldiery, that the parlament was soon after depos’d; and he himself (in the great hall of the pantheon or palace of justice, situated in Emporium the capital city) was created by the universal suffrage of the army, Lord Archon, or sole legislator of Oceana: upon which theatre you have, to conclude this piece, a person introduc’d, whose fame shall never draw its curtain.

The Lord Archon being created, fifty select persons to assist him (by laboring in the mines of antient prudence, and bringing its hidden treasures to new light) were added, with the stile also of legislators, and sat as a council, wherof he was the sole director and president.

[* ]Magistratus est lex armata.

[* ]Regebat magis autoritate quam imperio.

[* ]Si terra recedat, Ionium Ægæo frangat mare.

[* ]Censuere patres, jussit populus.

[* ]Consules sine lege curiata rem militarem attingere non potuerunt.

[* ]Authoritas patrum.

[† ]Senatusconsulta.

[‡ ]Ferre ad populum.

[* ]Authoritate patrum & jussu populi.

[* ]Qui beneficium accepit, libertatem vendidit.

[† ]Grata populo est tabella quæ frontes aperit hominum, mentes tegit, datque eam libertatem ut quod velint faciant.

[* ]

• Uno avulso, non deficit alter
• Aureus, & simili frondescit virga metallo.

[* ]De legibus.

[† ]De judiciis.

[* ]Nemo nocetur nisi ex se.

[* ]Comitia cum populo sortitus est.

[‡ ]Neque id existimare debes autorem me tibi esse, ut tyrannidem in S. P. Q. R. in servitutem redactum teneas: quod neque dicere meum, neque facere tuum est.

[* ]Cornua nota prius vitulo, quám frontibus extant.

[* ]Quòd nemo plebeius auspicia haberet.

[† ]Piebs ad d maximâ indignatione exa[Editor: illegible character]sit quod auspicari, tanquam invisi Diis immortalibus, negarentur posse. T. Liv. 4. 8.