1. man, at first, had no institutions. he existed in the simplest and most spontaneous way, finding shelter in caves and clefts of the rocks and beneath the primeval forests, groping his way by strong instincts which soon began to dawn into intelligence of the lowest and most material kind. how long[40] he led a purely animal life we have no means of knowing; but we may suppose that the necessities of self-preservation and his powerful social instincts very soon developed the germs of the family and of language.
childhood is comparatively long, and many generations must have passed before language could have acquired the distinctness and fixity that permitted it to come down through so long a period, and by so many different channels, to us. yet there is plain evidence of an eastern origin of all the various families of the race, and of a considerable mental development previous to the wanderings that peopled the east, the west, and the south. it has been remarked by geologists that the introduction of any class of animal life was never made by its very lowest orders, but usually by a class intermediate in organization between the highest and the lowest; some of the very lowest orders being represented in our own time.
2. a tolerably hardy race, which could endure the exposures and overcome the difficulties that must be greater for the first few generations than ever afterward, as we have every reason to believe, was first introduced. it has been common to suppose that man must have been supplied with a fund of knowledge, and a basis of language, to have successfully met the difficulties of his condition; but the uniform law that the faculties, the innate capabilities of his race, are conferred on him, and that he works them out by a process of development is observable in his entire history, so far as we can trace it. all needful capacities being lodged in him, with strong appetites and instincts to impel him to the objects most vitally necessary to his own preservation and the continuance of his species, and the material from which to work out his predestined ends being placed within his reach, it is made his indispensable duty and his glory to realize those ends, soon or late, by his own endeavors. the evidences of his early activity, unearthed here and there by geologists, show him to have advanced by degrees from the lowest points, and such corroborative[41] proof as the earliest forms of language afford are decidedly in the same direction.
3. many of the terms employed for the first and most familiar objects with which the necessities of life brought him in contact, show the very imperfect extent of his early knowledge and resources, and they gradually change in a way to indicate, most significantly, a slow and laborious, but constant enlargement of ideas by experience. he advanced then, as now, by degrees. the races latest in development, as well as most vigorous and intelligent, were the aryan, or indo-european. they have left the most definite traces of their early condition and advancement in the common elements of their various languages, which show very clearly how much time and toil were required to work out the features of their first institution—the family. the proper family type established relations of protection and dependence, of care and trust, of purity and tenderness, of provident foresight, and the shelter and comforts of home. apparently it was many centuries after the other races had begun to migrate that this last and most valuable stock commenced to be “fruitful and multiply,” to tame animals for their use, to enclose and render their habitations comfortable, and to organize and designate their family relations down to son-in-law and daughter-in-law, as well as to name the most common domestic animals and occupations.
4. the fact doubtless existed long before common experience and common consent had settled on the terms that have remained the same in the language of the hindoos, the greeks, the romans, and the germanic families; but by many certain signs we know that it was only gradually that the tenderness and beauty and usefulness of this institution had laid the sure foundation of a future vigorous and virtuous civilization. this race devoted themselves mainly to the care of flocks and herds, though we find among them the knowledge of wheat and some other grains; they had very little experience of war until they separated and began their wanderings,[42] as we infer from the fact that their common terms are nearly all peaceful—those designating a warlike habit differing in all the various branches of the stock.
the family, with them, was usually founded on marriage—the union of one man and one woman—which laid great restraints on vice and preserved the growing society from manifold evils. the other races—turanian, hamitic and semitic—appear to have been much more careless in this respect, and admitted a vicious element into the base of society, which loosened the bonds of relationship and discipline. they practiced polygamy, which magnified the position of the father, while it deprived him of the closer and more intimate relations to his household on which refinement depends, and degraded the mother who became the simple minister of pleasure to, and the means of increasing the influence of, the patriarchal head. this point is very vividly shown in the earlier history of the israelites where the unhappy effects of polygamy are distinctly portrayed. from the same source we see how the first institution among men gradually grew into the tribe, and the foundations of organized government were laid.
5. population rapidly increased, the original progenitor, or the oldest of his male descendants, became the fountain of authority and influence, and was, in many cases, the chief or king, exercising an undefined control, sometimes absolute and despotic, and again that of a merely nominal head, the variations taking every shade between the two. occasionally, special gifts, as energy, foresight and skill, favored by circumstances, raised one in the tribe to eminence, and he became the acknowledged ruler to the exclusion of the patriarch, or hereditary heir of the patriarchal office, as in the case of joseph in egypt, and, in later times, moses, joshua and the judges.
6. again, a pastoral life being abandoned, the people gathered for various reasons in towns, and cities were built up, where the original style of government became impossible, from the mixed character of the population; the oldest, or[43] family government, being founded on relationship and traditional respect. the need of leadership and the service rendered by some member of the community founded a despotic authority. in many cases a city was founded by an adventurer who had gathered supporters around him by some special ability, or by some accidental pre-eminence, as we see in nimrod and romulus; or, as often occurred, the head of a family or tribe which forsook the pastoral life and founded a city, from a patriarch or chieftain became a king.
government, in early times, was very imperfectly organized. it gradually advanced with some people to a high point; while with others it continued in a very undeveloped state for long periods—some races never having reached any high stage at all, or only temporarily under some talented individual.
the first settled governments are found in fertile river valleys where the cultivation of the soil arrested roving and desultory habits, and often formed the nucleus of an empire. there is reason to believe that the first emigration from the early home of the race was toward the east, that a state was soon formed in china which became considerably civilized and fairly well organized the earliest of all. their national traditions and some of their recorded dates claim a vast antiquity. it is not yet determined by scholars how much credit is to be allowed to these claims.
7. as it appears at present, two other governments were organized at nearly the same time, one in the lower valley of the euphrates and the other on the nile. it is also possible that a fourth was built up in india nearly cotemporary with these. certain similarities between the ancient ruins of egypt and india, and the traditions in the latter country have given rise to the suspicion; but no certainty has yet been reached. several systems of chronology, independent of each other, are found in egypt, all agreeing as to its enormous antiquity, but disagreeing in some important points, and satisfactory tests have not yet been met with, so that the early days of egypt are very obscure. the evidences of a clearly defined progress[44] are presented in its monuments, but the earliest bear so strong a resemblance to the later that there is some reason for supposing that the first inhabitants had reached a considerable degree of maturity before settling there. as yet, however, that point is only an inference—the most probable escape from a difficulty. the empires established on the euphrates, and north of that on the tigris, mark the steps of progress very distinctly, and furnish fairly satisfactory means of computing their general chronology.
8. in all these cases it appears from monuments, traditions, and from whatever information the records of the bible and other histories give us, that when men began to gather in communities, cultivate the ground and build cities, their governments were controlled by kings. despotic sovereignty was the natural and necessary instrument of government. the vigorous will of an admired chief concentrated the energies of the community, and a state was formed. the beginnings were very rude and improvement was slow, never reaching beyond the simple application of force as to the structure and modes of government. but another element, founded on the religious nature of mankind, which also had entered as an important influence into family government from the earliest times, became organized in the early days of monarchy, viz.:
the institution of a priesthood.
9. it would appear, from such traces of a religious tendency as are found in the primary languages, that the religious instinct was awakened by an observation of the forces of nature, which struck the mind with wonder, admiration, or terror. the mysteries of growth, the power of winds and storms and waters, the calm beauty, beneficence and brilliance of the sun, moon and stars riding undisturbed in the heavens, impressed man with a sense of something superior to himself. the moods of nature suggested some unknown being with a varying disposition like his own. his wants, his hopes and fears, and his sense of helplessness soon led him to seek to propitiate[45] these unknown powers. the first religion, among all the primitive nations, seems to have been a worship of the powers of nature. the head of the family was naturally the first priest of the family. this office increased the respect in which he was held by his multiplying descendants, and contributed to strengthen his authority.
10. but when, in the organization of cities and states, patriarchal influence decayed, and was replaced by the authority of the chieftain or the king, a class of men was set apart to fill the office of religious instructors, to discover the art and conduct the acts of general worship. the great mystery and uncertainty surrounding the objects of worship, required exclusive study and a supposed purity and elevation of mind impossible to others which soon raised the priesthood into an institution much revered. it acquired great influence, and afforded an opening to ambition only inferior to that of the chief or king. the two commonly united for mutual support, and thus mankind gained two institutions destined to be of incalculable value, as well as of almost boundless injury. in the earlier ages they must have been an almost unmixed good. they disciplined, the one the labors, the other the minds, of communities. they were the two most powerful instruments for initiating progress. they moulded the mass, gave it form, and directed its energies.
to a certain degree they each formed a check on the excessive tendencies of the other. but, the power of each fairly established, they often united to set very hurtful limits to spontaneous action. the king used his power to the common injury, and the priests their knowledge to the common debasement. the first exhausted the sources of prosperity and growth among his people to gratify his caprices and pleasures, and the priesthood promoted degrading superstitions and a gross idolatry to strengthen their influence. it was for the interest of both to keep the people in pupilage, and check all tendencies to independent action or thought. had it been[46] possible for them to be wise and high-minded, the race would have been saved many centuries of debasement and misery.
11. these evils were, in some degree, checked by influences which have ever since been the mainspring of progress—war and commerce. in early times, relationships of blood or of immediate interest were the chief bonds among men. all outside the family, tribe, or nation were usually held as enemies; and passion, interest, or ambition in the ruler led to constant conflict. but the shock of peoples awakened their minds, made them acquainted with each other, made their inventions and arts in some degree common property, and mingled the thought and blood of different races; and this greatly enlarged the ideas and capacities of both conquerors and conquered. the acquaintance made in this way, with men and countries, led to an interchange of products, during quiet times, and trade and commerce soon sprung up. this, appealing to the best interests and instincts of the most enterprising among the people, has always been a powerful instrument of advancement. it led to distant voyages and travels, to observation and intercourse, with a view to pecuniary advantage, to inventions and improvements in industry and art, that kept the peoples so related in a state of constant progress.
12. a growing population required increasing attention to agriculture and the mechanic arts, and increasing wealth led to architectural display and the increase of instruments of luxury, the production of which disciplined the skill of the artisan and contributed to the general growth. all these were the elements and foundation of civilization. an organization commenced, and a state founded, the king soon found leisure to look about and envy the wealth and territories of his neighbor. he made war and commenced a career of conquest, or fell, under defeat, into his neighbor’s hand, when time took a step forward, and a new consolidation, wider and higher than the former, was laid on a broader base. slowly but surely an advance was made.
13. we are now to observe this gradual development in[47] the successive history of five monarchies in asia and the kingdom of egypt, down to the time when they all fell before the conquering power of greece, under alexander the great, which introduces new and far higher elements of progress among the civilized races, and forms the full opening of a new era.
