the psychology of revolution-第20部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


when　war　was　decided　upon　he　mounted　the　tribune　of　the　Jacobins

and　declared　that　he　would　give　his　two　daughters　to　the　two

first　soldiers　to　be　wounded　by　the　enemy。　　He　wanted　the

nobles　to　be　killed；　&c。　　Now；　Monge　was　the　most　gentle　and

feeble　of　men；　and　wouldn't　have　had　a　chicken　killed　if　he　had

had　to　do　it　with　his　own　hands；　or　even　to　have　it　done　in　his

presence。''





3。　　A　Suggested　Explanation　of　the　Progressive　Exaggeration　of

Sentiments　in　Assemblies。





If　collective　sentiments　were　susceptible　of　exact　quantitative

measurement；　we　might　translate　them　by　a　curve　which；　after　a

first　gradual　ascent；　runs　upward　with　extreme　rapidity　and　then

falls　almost　vertically。　　The　equation　of　this　curve　might　be

called　the　equation　of　the　variations　of　collective　sentiments

subjected　to　a　constant　excitation。



It　is　not　always　easy　to　explain　the　acceleration　of　certain

sentiments　under　the　influence　of　a　constant　exciting　cause。　

Perhaps；　however；　one　may　say　that　if　the　laws　of　psychology　are

comparable　to　those　of　mechanics；　a　cause　of　invariable

dimensions　acting　in　a　continuous　fashion　will　rapidly　increase

the　intensity　of　a　sentiment。　　We　know；　for　example；　that　a　force

which　is　constant　in　dimension　and　direction；　such　as　gravity

acting　upon　a　mass；　will　cause　an　accelerated　movement。　　The

speed　of　a　free　object　falling　in　space　under　the　influence　of

gravity　will　be　about　32　feet　during　the　first　second；　64　feet

during　the　next；　96　feet　during　the　next；　&c。　　It　would　be　easy；

were　the　moving　body　allowed　to　fall　from　a　sufficient　height；　to

give　it　a　velocity　sufficient　to　perforate　a　plate　of　steel。



But　although　this　explanation　is　applicable　to　the　acceleration

of　a　sentiment　subjected　to　a　constant　exciting　cause；　it

does　not　tell　us　why　the　effects　of　acceleration　finally　and

suddenly　cease。　　Such　a　fall　is　only　comprehensible　if　we　bring

in　physiological　factorsthat　is；　if　we　remember　that　pleasure；

like　pain；　cannot　exceed　certain　limits；　and　that　all　sensations；

when　too　violent；　result　in　the　paralysis　of　sensation。　　Our

organism　can　only　support　a　certain　maximum　of　joy；　pain；　or

effort；　and　it　cannot　support　that　maximum　for　long　together。　

The　hand　which　grasps　a　dynamometer　soon　exhausts　its　effort；　and

is　obliged　suddenly　to　let　go。



The　study　of　the　causes　of　the　rapid　disappearance　of　certain

groups　of　sentiments　in　assemblies　will　remind　us　of　the　fact

that　beside　the　party　which　is　predominant　by　means　of　its

strength　or　prestige　there　are　others　whose　sentiments；

restrained　by　this　force　or　prestige；　have　not　reached　their　full

development。　　Some　chance　circumstance　may　somewhat　weaken　the

prevailing　party；　when　immediately　the　suppressed　sentiments　of

the　adverse　parties　may　become　preponderant。　　The　Mountain

learned　this　lesson　after　Thermidor。



All　analogies　that　we　may　seek　to　establish　between　the　laws　of

material　phenomena　and　those　which　condition　the　evolution　of

affective　and　mystic　factors　are　evidently　extremely　rough。　　They

must　be　so　until　the　mechanism　of　the　cerebral　functions　is

better　understood　than　it　is　to…day。









PART　II



THE　FRENCH　REVOLUTION





BOOK　I



THE　ORIGINS　OF　THE　FRENCH　REVOLUTION



CHAPTER　I



THE　OPINIONS　OF　HISTORIANS　CONCERNING　THE　FRENCH　REVOLUTION



1。　　The　Historians　of　the　Revolution。



The　most　contradictory　opinions　have　been　expressed　respecting

the　French　Revolution；　and　although　only　a　century　separates　us

from　the　period　in　question　it　seems　impossible　as　yet　to　judge

it　calmly。　　For　de　Maistre　it　was　‘‘a　satanic　piece　of　work；''

and　‘‘never　was　the　action　of　the　spirit　of　darkness　so　evidently

manifested。''　　For　the　modern　Jacobins　it　has　regenerated　the

human　race。



Foreigners　who　live　in　France　still　regard　it　as　a　subject　to　be

avoided　in　conversation。



‘‘Everywhere；''　writes　Barrett　Wendell；　‘‘this　memory　and　these

traditions　are　still　endowed　with　such　vitality　that　few　persons

are　capable　of　considering　them　dispassionately。　　They　still

excite　both　enthusiasm　and　resentment；　they　are　still　regarded

with　a　loyal　and　ardent　spirit　of　partisanship。　　The　better　you

come　to　understand　France　the　more　clearly　you　see　that　even　to…

day　no　study　of　the　Revolution　strikes　any　Frenchman　as

having　been　impartial。''



This　observation　is　perfectly　correct。　　To　be　interpretable　with

equity；　the　events　of　the　past　must　no　longer　be　productive　of

results　and　must　not　touch　the　religious　or　political　beliefs

whose　inevitable　intolerance　I　have　denoted。



We　must　not　therefore　be　surprised　that　historians　express　very

different　ideas　respecting　the　Revolution。　　For　a　long　time　to

come　some　will　still　see　in　it　one　of　the　most　sinister　events　of

history；　while　to　others　it　will　remain　one　of　the　most　glorious。



All　writers　on　the　subject　have　believed　that　they　have　related

its　course　with　impartiality；　but　in　general　they　have　merely

supported　contradictory　theories　of　peculiar　simplicity。　　The

documents　being　innumerable　and　contradictory；　their　conscious　or

unconscious　choice　has　readily　enabled　them　to　justify　their

respective　theories。



The　older　historians　of　the　RevolutionThiers；　Quinet；　and；

despite　his　talent；　Michelet　himself；　are　somewhat　eclipsed　to…

day。　　Their　doctrines　were　by　no　means　complicated；　a　historic

fatalism　prevails　generally　in　their　work。　　Thiers　regarded　the

Revolution　as　the　result　of　several　centuries　of　absolute

monarchy；　and　the　Terror　as　the　necessary　consequence　of　foreign

invasion。　　Quinet　described　the　excesses　of　1793　as　the　result　of

a　long…continued　despotism；　but　declared　that　the　tyranny　of　the

Convention　was　unnecessary；　and　hampered　the　work　of　the

Revolution。　　Michelet　saw　in　this　last　merely　the　work　of　the

people；　whom　he　blindly　admired；　and　commenced　the　glorification

continued　by　other　historians。



The　former　reputation　of　all　these　historians　has　been　to　a　great

extent　effaced　by　that　of　Taine。　　Although　equally　impassioned；

he　threw　a　brilliant　light　upon　the　revolutionary　period；　and　it

will　doubtless　be　long　before　his　work　is　superseded。



Work　so　important　is　bound　to　show　faults。　　Taine　is　admirable　in

the　representation　of　facts　and　persons；　but　he　attempts　to　judge

by　the　standard　of　rational　logic　events　which　were　not　dictated

by　reason；　and　which；　therefore；　he　cannot　interpret。　　His

psychology；　excellent　when　it　is　merely　descriptive；　is　very　weak

as　soon　as　it　becomes　explanatory。　　To　affirm　that　Robespierre

was　a　pedantic　‘‘swotter''　is　not　to　reveal　the　causes　of　his

absolute　power　over　the　Convention；　at　a　time　when　he　had　spent

several　months　in　decimating　it　with　perfect　impunity。　　It　has

very　justly　been　said　of　Taine　that　he　saw　well　and　understood

little。



Despite　these　restrictions　his　work　is　highly　remarkable　and　has

not　been　equalled。　　We　may　judge　of　his　immense　influence　by　the

exasperation　which　he　causes　among　the　faithful　defenders　of

Jacobin　orthodoxy；　of　which　M。　Aulard；　professor　at　the　Sorbonne；

is　to…day　the　high　priest。　　The　latter　has　devoted　two　years　to

writing　a　pamphlet　against　Taine；　every　line　of　which　is　steeped

in　passion。　　All　this　time　spent　in　rectifying　a　few　material

errors　which　are　not　really　significant　has　only　resulted　in　the

perpetration　of　the　very　same　errors。



Reviewing　his　work；　M。　A。　Cochin　shows　that　M。　Aulard　has　at

least　on　every　other　occasion　been　deceived　by　his　quotations；

whereas　Taine　erred　far　more　rarely。　　The　same　historian　shows

also　that　we　must　not　trust　M。　Aulard's　sources。



‘‘These　sourcesproceedings；　pamphlets；　journals；　and　the

speeches　and　writings　of　patriotsare　precisely　the　authentic

publications　of　patriotism；　edited　by　patriots；　and　edited；　as　a

rule；　for　the　benefit　of　the　public。　　He　ought　to　have　seen　in

all　this　simply　the　special　pleading　of　the　defendant：　he　had；

before　his　eyes；　a　ready…made　history　of　the　Revolution；　which

presents；　side　by　side　with　each　of　the　acts　of　the　‘People；'

from　the　massacres　of　September　to　the　law　of　Prairial；　a　ready…

made　explanation　according　to　the　republican　system　of　defence。''



Perhaps　the　fairest　criticism　that　one　can　make　of　the　work　of

Taine　is　that　it　was　left　incomplete。　　He　studied　more　especially

the　role　of　the　populace　and　its　leaders　during　the

revolutionary　period。　　This　inspired　him　with　pages　vibrating

with　an　indignation　which　we　can　still　admire；　but　several

important　aspects　of　the　Revolution　escaped　him。



Whatever　one　may　think　of　the　Revolution；　an　irreducible

difference　will　always　exist　between　historians　of　the　school　of

Taine　and　those　of　the　school　of　M。　Aulard。　　The　latter　regards

the　sovereign　people　as　admirable；　while　the　former　shows　us　that

when　abandoned　to　its　instincts　and　liberated　from　all　social

restraint　it　relapses　i