to keep up any tolerable Degree of Order in the World. The Luft of Avarice and Ambition now indeed divide Mankind, and destroy their mutual Harmony. But before Covetousness crept into the World; before Men had any Temptation to invade the Rights of Equality; when Titles, Distinctions, and Pre-eminences were yet unknown; why might not a Number of People have lived together in Amity, enjoying every thing in common, and content with the natural Products of the Earth in some happy Climate? Because it is inconfiftent with the Nature of human Creatures, anfwered Sophronius, that any Number of them should live together in Concord, without the Curb of Government. Had we come into the World with fuch Difpofitions, as our first Parents are faid to have poffeffed before their Fall; then indeed thofe tranquil Joys, which have (it should feem) flourished only in Song, might have exifted in reality. But as to their unhappy Offspring, born, as they are, with depraved Appetites, and inordinate Self-Paffions, it is abfolutely impoffible, that either Order, Peace, or Juftice could ever have prevailed amongst them, without the Aid of fome reftraining Force. Let a Man fairly examine Human Nature, the Tendency and Effects of our Paffions; and he must allow this to be the Cafe. It is in vain to produce any Authority against the Nature of Things; and leaft of all, that of the Poets. They, you know, are not generally the stricteft ReaX 3 foners; foners; their Aim being rather to please than inform. And though there is a Thing, which we call Truth in their Art; yet not being tied down to fevere hiftorical Matter of Fact, they are at Liberty to create Scenes, which exist only in Imagination. But if Names are of any Force, I could produce [f] Isocrates, [g] Diodorus, and Numbers of the most celebrated Ancients, who reprefent the Infancy of the World as rude and barbarous, as Hobbs, or any of the Moderns fuppofe it to have been. Seneca, I will not deny, feems to favour your Opinion: And in one of his Epiftles, the Philofopher is not lefs warm than the Poet, in the Defcription of a Golden Age [b]. But after he had indulged his lively Genius in the Sallies of Imagination, Reafon re-affumes her Seat, and he freely owns, that Philofophy was unknown to the World in that early Period; that it was indeed an Age of Innocence, but not of Wifdom; and that the moral Character was not then thoroughly understood. For Virtue, says he, is not the Gift of Nature, but the Product of Art. The Seeds of it are indeed fown in our Hearts; but if [f] Ifocrates, Orat, iii. ad Nicoclem. [g] Diodorus Siculus, lib. i. [b] Quamvis egregia illis vita fuerit, & carens fraude, non fuere fapientes-Non erant ingenia omnibus confummata--Non enim dat natura virtutem; ars eft, bonum fieri-Ignorantiâ rerum innocentes erant. Multùm autem intereft, utrùm peccare aliquis nolit, an nesciat.. Deerat illis juftitia, deerat prudentia, deerat temperantia & fortitudo. Omnibus his virtutibus habebat fimilia quædam rudis vita: virtus non contingit animo, nifi inftituto & edocto, & ad fummum affi. duâ cogitatione perduto. Ad hoc quidem, fed fine hoc nafcimur: & in optimis quoque antequàm erudias, virtutis materia, non virtus eft. SEN. Epift. go. they they are not cultivated with the utmoft Diligence and Care, they will for ever remain in a dormant and inactive State. Does not this Conceffion entirely demolish the fine Fabric he had just before erected? For furely Mankind must have been abfolutely incapable of living together in focial Harmony, whilft the Mind had not yet received that Cultivation, which is requifité to unfold thofe latent Principles of Virtue; without which, it is impoffible that Numbers can live toge ther with any Sort of Comfort, or maintain any tos lerable Degree of Peace and Order. Cicero feems clearly to be of this Opinion; for he derives all focial Concord from the Difcipline of Philofophy, when he breaks out into a celebrated Rhapfody upon the pleafing Reflexion [i]. If the Truth of Opinions, returned Philocles, were to be determined by Antiquity; those, who maintain the Sentiments I am contending for, might at least go as high for their Authority, as their Oppofers. The Lines I repeated from Ovid feem to be copied from Heftod; who, as fome affirm, was contemporary with Homer. Though indeed, to trace this Notion of the Golden Age up to it's true Source, we muft look for it in the Mofaical Account of the first [i] O vitæ philofophia dux! O virtutis indagatrix, expultrixque vitiorum! Tu urbes peperifti; tu diffipatos homines in focietatem vitæ convocafti: tu eos inter fe primò domiciliis, deindè conjugiis, tum literarum et vocum communione junxifti: tu inventrix legum, tu magiftra morum, & difciplinæ fuifti ! CICERO Tufc. Difp. Ald. Venet. p. 242. State Dial. I. State of the World, from whence it seems to be derived. But however, it is certain that the State of Nature, as defcribed by Hobbs, and his followers, could not have fubfifted long enough to be called a State, admitting it ever fubfifted at all. As it was nothing but a Scene of War, conqueft muft either have foon introduced Subjection; or the Sons of Men must have been totally extinct. This [k] Lucretius himself admits, and owns that Mankind muft neceffarily have perished under the Inconveniences of fuch a Situation. Now from hence, it should seem, a ftrong Reason might be drawn, to prove that this State of Nature is, at leaft, as vifionary as the Golden Age. For tell me, Sophronius, can it be fuppofed with any Justice to the Wisdom of the supreme Being, that he placed Mankind originally in a Situation, that must neceffarily have defeated the Ends of their Creation, and utterly extirpated the whole Species from off the Face of the Earth? To argue, replied Sophronius, against the Reality of a Fact, from its Consequences, is hardly a safe Method of investigating speculative Truths; I mean, where the Evidence is ftrong on the Side of the Fact; and the Confequences are, at beft, but hypothetical. This at least you must allow, that the Doctrine I contend for, has many great and illuftrious Names on its Side. [*] Genus humanum jam tum foret omne peremptum : Nec potuiffet adhuc perducere fæcla propago. Lucret. lib. v. lin. 1025. Not pro Not fo many, returned Philocles, as might be duced on the contrary []. The noble Moralift has opposed it with that Senfe and Spirit, which fo eminently diftinguish his excellent Writings [m]. Mr. Locke indeed fpeaks of a State of Nature, in Contradiftinction to civil Societies; and feems to think it might have exifted [n]. But then he represents it, not as a State of Licence and Disorder, but as fubject to the Laws of Reafon ; which, if I do not mistake, is the very thing which Ovid intended in his Defcription of the Golden Age: For, no doubt, when the Poet fays, Men observed the Rules of Right and Juftice without Laws; he muft mean, without those of civil Compact. That Mankind are naturally of an uniting focial Temper, is maintained by Grotius, Puffendorff, and many other great and learned Men. Now if their natural Sociability be once admitted; the State of Nature, as defcribed by Hobbs, and [] Nihil eft tam illuftre, quàm conjunctio inter homines hominumet ipfa caritas generis humani, quæ nata à fatu, quo à procreatoribus nati deliguntur, & tota domus conjugio & ftirps conjungitur, ferpfit fenfim foràs cognationibus primùm, tum affinitatibus, deinde amicitiis, poft vicinitatibus, tum civibus, &c. Cicer, de Fin, lib. v. edit. Ald. p. 119. -Omnes inter fe naturali quadam benevolentia continentur Ibid De Legibus. lib. i. p. 179. Conftituendi verò juris ab illa fumma lege capiamus exordium; quæ feculis omnibus antè nata est, quàm fcripta lex ulla, aut quam omnino Ibidem, Leg. t. in initio. civitas eft conftituta. [m] Lord Shaftesbury. I [] Treatife on Government. adopted |