按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
not the devil but a German； who moves the locomotive。 Only then； as
a result of the contradiction； will they see that they are both wrong。
But the man who says that the movement of the wheels is the cause
refutes himself； for having once begun to analyze he ought to go on
and explain further why the wheels go round； and till he has reached
the ultimate cause of the movement of the locomotive in the pressure
of steam in the boiler； he has no right to stop in his search for
the cause。 The man who explains the movement of the locomotive by
the smoke that is carried back has noticed that the wheels do not
supply an explanation and has taken the first sign that occurs to
him and in his turn has offered that as an explanation。
The only conception that can explain the movement of the
locomotive is that of a force commensurate with the movement observed。
The only conception that can explain the movement of the peoples
is that of some force commensurate with the whole movement of the
peoples。
Yet to supply this conception various historians take forces of
different kinds； all of which are incommensurate with the movement
observed。 Some see it as a force directly inherent in heroes； as the
peasant sees the devil in the locomotive； others as a force
resulting from several other forces； like the movement of the
wheels； others again as an intellectual influence； like the smoke that
is blown away。
So long as histories are written of separate individuals； whether
Caesars； Alexanders； Luthers； or Voltaires； and not the histories of
all； absolutely all those who take part in an event； it is quite
impossible to describe the movement of humanity without the conception
of a force compelling men to direct their activity toward a certain
end。 And the only such conception known to historians is that of
power。
This conception is the one handle by means of which the material
of history； as at present expounded； can be dealt with； and anyone who
breaks that handle off； as Buckle did； without finding some other
method of treating historical material； merely deprives himself of the
one possible way of dealing with it。 The necessity of the conception
of power as an explanation of historical events is best demonstrated
by the universal historians and historians of culture themselves；
for they professedly reject that conception but inevitably have
recourse to it at every step。
In dealing with humanity's inquiry； the science of history up to now
is like money in circulation… paper money and coin。 The biographies
and special national histories are like paper money。 They can be
used and can circulate and fulfill their purpose without harm to
anyone and even advantageously； as long as no one asks what is the
security behind them。 You need only forget to ask how the will of
heroes produces events； and such histories as Thiers' will be
interesting and instructive and may perhaps even possess a tinge of
poetry。 But just as doubts of the real value of paper money arise
either because； being easy to make； too much of it gets made or
because people try to exchange it for gold； so also doubts
concerning the real value of such histories arise either because too
many of them are written or because in his simplicity of heart someone
inquires： by what force did Napoleon do this？… that is； wants to
exchange the current paper money for the real gold of actual
comprehension。
The writers of universal histories and of the history of culture are
like people who； recognizing the defects of paper money； decide to
substitute for it money made of metal that has not the specific
gravity of gold。 It may indeed make jingling coin； but will do no more
than that。 Paper money may deceive the ignorant； but nobody is
deceived by tokens of base metal that have no value but merely jingle。
As gold is gold only if it is serviceable not merely for exchange
but also for use； so universal historians will be valuable only when
they can reply to history's essential question： what is power？ The
universal historians give contradictory replies to that question；
while the historians of culture evade it and answer something quite
different。 And as counters of imitation gold can be used only among
a group of people who agree to accept them as gold； or among those who
do not know the nature of gold； so universal historians and historians
of culture； not answering humanity's essential question； serve as
currency for some purposes of their own； only in universities and
among the mass of readers who have a taste for what they call 〃serious
reading。〃
EP2｜CH4
CHAPTER IV
Having abandoned the conception of the ancients as to the divine
subjection of the will of a nation to some chosen man and the
subjection of that man's will to the Deity； history cannot without
contradictions take a single step till it has chosen one of two
things： either a return to the former belief in the direct
intervention of the Deity in human affairs or a definite explanation
of the meaning of the force producing historical events and termed
〃power。〃
A return to the first is impossible； the belief has been
destroyed； and so it is essential to explain what is meant by power。
Napoleon ordered an army to be raised and go to war。 We are so
accustomed to that idea and have become so used to it that the
question： why did six hundred thousand men go to fight when Napoleon
uttered certain words； seems to us senseless。 He had the power and
so what he ordered was done。
This reply is quite satisfactory if we believe that the power was
given him by God。 But as soon as we do not admit that； it becomes
essential to determine what is this power of one man over others。
It cannot be the direct physical power of a strong man over a weak
one… a domination based on the application or threat of physical
force； like the power of Hercules； nor can it be based on the effect
of moral force； as in their simplicity some historians think who say
that the leading figures in history are heroes； that is； men gifted
with a special strength of soul and mind called genius。 This power
cannot be based on the predominance of moral strength； for； not to
mention heroes such as Napoleon about whose moral qualities opinions
differ widely； history shows us that neither a Louis XI nor a
Metternich； who ruled over millions of people； had any particular
moral qualities； but on the contrary were generally morally weaker
than any of the millions they ruled over。
If the source of power lies neither in the physical nor in the moral
qualities of him who possesses it； it must evidently be looked for
elsewhere… in the relation to the people of the man who wields the
power。
And that is how power is understood by the science of jurisprudence；
that exchange bank of history which offers to exchange history's
understanding of power for true gold。
Power is the collective will of the people transferred； by expressed
or tacit consent； to their chosen rulers。
In the domain of jurisprudence； which consists of discussions of how
a state and