In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

155 u s e c t i o n v i u Speculations on the probable Consequences of the French Revolution in Europe. There is perhaps only one opinion about the French Revolution in which its friends and its enemies agree. They both conceive that its influence will not be confined to France; they both predict that it will produce important changes in the general state of Europe. This is the theme of the exultation of its admirers, this is the source of the alarms of its detractors. It were indeed difficult to suppose that a Revolution so unparalelled should take place in the most renowned of the European nations, without spreading its influence throughout the Christian Commonwealth; connected as it is by the multiplied relations of politics, by the common interest of commerce, by the wide intercourse of curiosity and of literature,bysimilar arts and by congenial manners. The channels by which the prevailing sentiments of France may enter into the other nations of Europe, are so obvious and so numerous, that it were unnecessary and tedioustodetailthem, but I may remark as among the most conspicuous, a central situation, a predominating language, an authority almost legislative in the ceremonial of the private intercourse of life. These and many other causes must facilitate the diffusion of French politics among the neighbouring nations, but it will be justly remarked, that their effect must in a great measure depend on the stability of the Revolution. The suppression of an honourable revolt would strengthen all the governments of Europe; the view of a splendid Revolution would be the signal of insurrection to their subjects . Any reasonings on the influ-enceof theFrenchRevolutionmay therefore be supposed to be premature until its permanence be ascertained. 156 vindiciae gallicae Of that permanence my conviction is firm, but I am sensible that in the field of political prediction, where veteran sagacity* has so often been deceived ; it becomes me to harbour with distrust, and to propose with dif- fidence a conviction influenced by partial enthusiasm, and perhaps produced by the inexperienced ardour of youth. The moment at which I write is peculiarly critical (August 25th 1791). The invasion of France is now spoken of as immediate by the exiles and their partizans; and the confederacy of despots† is announced with new confidence; but notwithstanding these threats, I retain my doubts whether the jarring interests of the European courts will permit this alliance to have much energy or cordiality ; and whether the cautious prudence of despots will send their military slaves to a school of freedom in France; but if there be doubts about the likelihood of the enterprize being undertaken, there can be few about the probability of its event. History celebrates many conquests of obscure tribes whose valour was animated by enthusiasm, but she records no example where foreign force has subjugated a powerful and gallant people, governed by the most imperious passion‡ that can sway the human * Witness the memorable example of Harrington, who published a demonstration of the impossibility of reestablishing monarchy in England six months before the restoration of Charles II. [Probably a reference to James Harrington, Valerius and Publicola (London, 1659). For a recent edition see The Political Works of James Harrington , ed. J. G. A. Pocock (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 781–806.] Religious prophecies have usually the inestimable convenience of relating to a distant futurity. † The malignant hostility displayed against French freedom by a perfidious Prince, who occupies and dishonours the throne of Gustavus Vasa, cannot excite our wonder , though it may provoke our indignation. The Pensioner of French despotism could not rejoice in its destruction, nor could a monarch, whose boasted talents have hitherto been confined to perjury and usurpation, fail to be wounded by the establishment of freedom; for freedom demands genius, not intrigue; wisdom, not cunning. ‡ May I be permitted to state how the ancestors of a nation now stigmatized for servility, felt this powerful sentiment. The Scottish nobles contending for their liberty under Robert Bruce, thus spoke to the Pope, “Non pugnamus propter divitiashonores, aut dignitates sed propter Libertatem tantummodo quam nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit!”—Nor was this sentiment confined to the Magnates, for the same letter declares the assent of the Commons: “Totaque Communitas Regni Scotiae!”— [“Itisin truthnotfor glory,norriches,norhonorsthatwearefighting,butforfreedom— for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself”; and “the whole community of the realm...

Share