absorbedinthelarger，thelargerhaveagainbeenswallowedup
instillwider，andtheseinyetwiderareas。Locallifeand
villagecustomhavenot，itistrue，decayedeverywhereinthe
samedegree。ThereismuchmoreoftheminRussiathanin
Germany；moreoftheminGermanythaninEngland；moreofthemin
EnglandthaninFrance。Butonthewhole，wheneverthemodern
Stateisformed，itisanassemblageoffragmentsconsiderably
smallerthanthosewhichmadeupempiresoftheearliertype，and
considerablylikertooneanother。
Itwouldberashtolaydownconfidentlywhichiscauseand
whichisconsequence，butunquestionablythiscompleter
triturationinmodernsocietiesofthegroupswhichoncelived
withanindependentlifehasproceededconcurrentlywithmuch
greateractivityinlegislation。Wherevertheprimitivecondition
ofanAryanracerevealsitselfeitherthroughhistoricalrecords
orthroughthesurvivalofitsancientinstitutions，theorgan
whichintheelementarygroupcorrespondstowhatwecallthe
legislature，iseverywherediscernible。ItistheVillage
Council，sometimesowningaresponsibilitytotheentirebodyof
villagers，sometimesdisclaimingit，sometimesovershadowedby
theauthorityofanhereditarychief，butneveraltogether
obscured。Fromthisembryohavesprungallthemostfamous
legislaturesoftheworld，theAthenianEkklesia，theRoman
Comitia，SenateandPrince，andourownParliament，thetypeand
parentofallthe’collegiatesovereignties’asAustinwould
callthemofthemodernworld，orinotherwordsofall
governmentsinwhichsovereignpowerisexercisedbythepeople
orsharedbetweenthepeopleandtheKing。Yet，ifweexaminethe
undevelopedformofthisorganofState，itslegislativefaculty
isitsleastdistinctandleastenergeticfaculty。Inpointof
fact，asIhaveobservedelsewhere，thevariousshadesofthe
powerlodgedwiththeVillageCouncil，undertheempireofthe
ideaspropertoit，arenotdistinguishedfromoneanother，nor
doesthemindseeacleardifferencebetweenmakingalaw，
declaringalaw，andpunishinganoffenderagainstalaw。Ifthe
powersofthisbodymustbedescribedbymodernnames，thatwhich
liesmostinthebackgroundislegislativepower，thatwhichis
mostdistinctlyconceivedisjudicialpower。Thelawsobeyedare
regardedashavingalwaysexisted，andusagesreallyneware
confoundedwiththereallyold。
Thevillage-communitiesoftheAryanracedonottherefore
exercisetruelegislativepowersolongastheyremainunder
primitiveinfluences。Noragainislegislativepowerexercisedin
anyintelligiblesenseofthewordsbytheSovereignsofthose
greatStates，nowconfinedtotheEast，whichpreservethe
primitivelocalgroupsmostnearlyintact。Legislation，aswe
conceiveit，andthebreakupoflocallifeappeartohave
universallygoneontogether。ComparetheHindoo
village-communityinIndiawiththeTeutonicvillage-communityin
England。Thefirstofthem，amongalltheinstitutionsofthe
countrywhicharenotmodernandofBritishconstruction，isfar
themostdefinite，farthemoststronglymarked，farthemost
highlyorganised。Ofthelatter，theancientEnglishcommunity，
thevestigesmaycertainlybetracked，butthecomparativemethod
hastobecalledin，andthewrittenlawandwrittenhistoryof
manycenturiessearched，beforetheirsignificancecanbe
understoodandthebrokenoutlinerestoredtocompleteness。Itis
impossiblenottoconnectthedifferingvitalityofthesame
institutionwithcertainotherphenomenaofthetwocountries。In
India，MogulandMahratta，followingalongseriesofearlier
conquerors，havesweptoverthevillage-communities，butafter
includingtheminanominalempiretheyhaveimposednopermanent
obligationbeyondthepaymentoftaxortribute。Ifonsomerare
occasionstheyhaveattemptedtheenforcedreligiousconversion
ofsubjugatedpopulations，thetemplesandtheriteshavebeenat
mostchanged。inthevillages，whilethecivilinstitutionshave
beenleftuntouched。HereinEnglandthestrugglebetweenthe
centralandthelocalpowerhasfollowedaverydifferentcourse。
WecanseeplainlythattheKing’slawandtheKing’scourtshave
beenperpetuallycontendingagainstthelocallawandthelocal
courts，andthevictoryoftheKing’slawhasdrawnafteritthe
longseriesofActsofParliamentfoundedonitsprinciples。The
wholeprocesscanonlybecalledlegislationeverincreasingin
energy，untiltheancientmultifariouslawofthecountryhas
beenallbutcompletelyabolished，andtheoldusagesofthe
independentcommunitieshavedegeneratedintothecustomsof
manorsorintomerehabitshavingnosanctionfromlaw。
ThereismuchreasontobelievethattheRomanEmpirewasthe
sourceoftheinfluenceswhichhaveled，immediatelyor
ultimately，totheformationofhighly-centralised，
actively-legislating，States。Itwasthefirstgreatdominion
whichdidnotmerelytax，butlegislatedalso。Theprocesswas
spreadovermanycenturies。IfIhadtofixtheepochsofits
commencementandcompletion，Ishouldplacethemroughlyatthe
issueofthefirstEdictumProvinciale，andattheextensionof
theRomancitizenshiptoallsubjectsoftheempire，butnodoubt
thefoundationsofthechangewerelaidconsiderablybeforethe
firstperiod，anditwascontinuedinsomewayslongafterthe
last。But，intheresult，avastandmiscellaneousmassof
customarylawwasbrokenupandreplacedbynewinstitutions。
Seeninthislight，theRomanEmpireisaccuratelydescribedin
theProphecyofDaniel。Itdevoured，brakeinpieces，andstamped
theresiduewithitsfeet。
TheirruptionofthebarbarianracesintotheEmpirediffused
throughthecommunitiesincludedinitamultitudeofthe
primitivetribalandvillageideaswhichtheyhadlost。
Neverthelessnosocietydirectlyorindirectlyinfluencedbythe
Empirehasbeenaltogetherlikethesocietiesformedonthatmore
ancientsystemwhichtheimmobilityoftheEasthascontinued
tillwecanactuallyobserveit。Inallcommonwealthsofthe
firstkind，Sovereigntyismoreorlessdistinctlyassociated
withlegislativepower，andthedirectioninwhichthispowerwas
tobeexercisedwasinaconsiderablenumberofcountriesclearly
chalkedoutbythejurisprudencewhichtheEmpireleftbehindit。
TheRomanlaw，fromwhichthemostancientlegalnotionshadbeen
almostwhollyexpelled，waspalpablythegreatsolventoflocal
usageeverywhere。Therearethustwotypesoforganisedpolitical
society。Inthemoreancientofthese，thegreatbulkofmen
derivetheirrulesoflifefromthecustomsoftheirvillageor
city，buttheyoccasionally，thoughmostimplicitly，obeythe
commandsofanabsoluterulerwhotakestaxesfromthembutnever
legislates，Intheother，andtheonewithwhichwearemost
familiar，theSovereignisevermoreactivelylegislatingon
principlesofhisown，whilelocalcustomandideaareever
hasteningtodecay。Itseemstomethatinthepassagefromone
ofthesepoliticalsystemstoanother，lawshavedistinctly
alteredtheircharacter。TheForce，forexample，whichisatthe
backoflaw，canonlybecalledthesamebyamerestrainingof
language。Customarylaw——asubjectonwhichallofAustin’s
remarksseemtomecomparativelyunfruitful——isnotobeyed，as
enactedlawisobeyed。Whenitobtainsoversmallareasandin
smallnaturalgroups，thepenalsanctionsonwhichitdependsare
partlyopinion，partlysuperstition，buttoafargreaterextent
aninstinctalmostasblindandunconsciousasthatwhich
producessomeofthemovementsofourbodies。Theactual
constraintwhichisrequiredtosecureconformitywithusageis
inconceivablysmall。When，however，theruleswhichhavetobe
obeyedonceemanatefromanauthorityexternaltothesmall
naturalgroupandformingnopartofit，theywearacharacter
whollyunlikethatofacustomaryrule。Theylosetheassistance
ofsuperstition，probablythatofopinion，certainlythatof
spontaneousimpulse。Theforceatthebackoflawcomestherefore
tobepurelycoerciveforcetoadegreequiteunknownin
societiesofthemoreprimitivetype。Moreover，inmany
communities，thisforcehastoactataverygreatdistancefrom
thebulkofthepersonsexposedtoit，andthustheSovereignwho
wieldsithastodealwithgreatclassesofactsandwithgreat
classesofpersons，ratherthanwithisolatedactsandwith
individuals。Amongtheconsequencesofthisnecessityaremanyof
thecharacteristicssometimessupposedtobeinseparablefrom
laws，theirindifferency，theirinexorableness，andtheir
generality。
AndastheconceptionofForceassociatedwithlawshas
altered，soalso，Ithink，hastheconceptionofOrder。Inthe
elementarysocialgroupsformedbymenoftheAryanrace，nothing
canbemoremonotonousthantheroutineofvillagecustom。
Nevertheless，intheinteriorofthehouseholdswhichtogether
makeupthevillage-community，thedespotismofusageisreplaced
bythedespotismofpaternalauthority。Outsideeachthresholdis
immemorialcustomblindlyobeyed；insideisthePatriaPotestas
exercisedbyahalf-civilisedmanoverwife，child，andslave。So
farthenaslawsarecommands，theywouldbeassociatedinthis
stageofsocietylesswithinvariableorderthanwithinscrutable
caprice；anditiseasiertosupposethemenofthosetimes
lookingtothesuccessionofnaturalphenomena，dayandnight，
summerandwinter，fortypesofregularity，thantothewordsand
actionsofthoseabovethemwhopossessedcoercivepowerover
them。
TheForcethenwhichisatthebackoflawswasnotalways
thesame。TheOrderwhichgoeswiththemwasnotalwaysthesame。
Theyhaveonlygraduallyattractedtothemselvestheattributes
whichseemessentialtothemnotonlyinthepopularviewbutto
thepenetratingeyeoftheAnalyticalJurist，Theirgenerality
andtheirdependenceonthecoerciveforceofaSovereignarethe
resultofthegreatterritorialareaofmodernStates，ofthe
comminutionofthesub-groupswhichcomposethem，andaboveall
oftheexampleandinfluenceoftheRomanCommonwealthunder
Assembly，Senate，andPrince，whichfromveryearlytimeswas
distinguishedfromallotherdominationsandpowersinthatit
brakeupmorethoroughlythatwhichitdevoured。
Ithassometimesbeensaidofgreatsystemsofthoughtthat
nothingbutanaccidentpreventedtheircomingintoexistence
centuriesbeforetheiractualbirth。Nosuchassertioncanbe
madeofthesystemoftheAnalyticalJurists，whichcouldnot
havebeenconceivedinthebrainofitsauthorstillthetimewas
fullyripeforit。Hobbes’sgreatdoctrineisplainlytheresult
ofageneralisationwhichhehadopportunitiesunrivalledinthat
dayforeffecting，sinceduringthevirilityofhisintellecthe
wasasmuchontheContinentasinEngland，firstasatravelling
tutorandafterwardsasanexileflyingfromcivildisturbances。
IndependentlyofEnglishaffairs，whichhecertainlyviewedasa
strongpartisan，thephenomenawhichhehadtoobservewere
governmentsrapidlycentralisingthemselves，localprivilegesand
jurisdictionsinextremedecay，theoldhistoricalbodies，such
astheFrenchParliaments，tendingforthetimetobecome
furnacesofanarchy，theonlyhopeoforderdiscoverablein
kinglypower。Thesewereamongthepalpablefruitsofthewars
whichendedinthePeaceofWestphalia。Theoldmultiformlocal
activityoffeudalorquasi-feudalsocietywaseverywhere
enfeebledordestroyed；ifithadcontinued，thesystemofthis
greatthinkerwouldalmostcertainlyhaveneverseenthelight；