the psychology of revolution-第6章

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！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



to　Henri　III。；　who　had　fled　from　his　capital。　　In　1577　the

traveller　Lippomano；　who　traversed　France；　saw　important　cities

Orleans；　Tours；　Blois；　Poitiersentirely　devastated；　the

cathedrals　and　churches　in　ruins；　and　the　tombs　shattered。　　This

was　almost　the　state　of　France　at　the　end　of　the　Directory。



Among　the　events　of　this　epoch；　that　which　has　left　the　darkest

memory；　although　it　was　not　perhaps　the　most　murderous；　was　the

massacre　of　St。　Bartholomew　in　1572；　ordered；　according　to　the

historians；　by　Catherine　de　Medicis　and　Charles　IX。



One　does　not　require　a　very　profound　knowledge　of　psychology　to

realise　that　no　sovereign　could　have　ordered　such　an　event。　　St。

Bartholomew's　Day　was　not　a　royal　but　a　popular　crime。　　Catherine

de　Medicis；　believing　her　existence　and　that　of　the　king

threatened　by　a　plot　directed　by　four　or　five　Protestant　leaders

then　in　Paris；　sent　men　to　kill　them　in　their　houses；　according

to　the　summary　fashion　of　the　time。　　The　massacre　which　followed

is　very　well　explained　by　M。　Battifol　in　the　following　terms：



‘‘At　the　report　of　what　was　afoot　the　rumour　immediately　ran

through　Paris　that　the　Huguenots　were　being　massacred；　Catholic

gentlemen；　soldiers　of　the　guard；　archers；　men　of　the　people；　in

short　all　Paris；　rushed　into　the　streets；　arms　in　hand；　in　order

to　participate　in　the　execution；　and　the　general　massacre

commenced；　to　the　sound　of　ferocious　cries　of　‘The

Huguenots！　Kill；　kill！'　　They　were　struck　down；　they　were

drowned；　they　were　hanged。　　All　that　were　known　as　heretics　were

so　served。　　Two　thousand　persons　were　killed　in　Paris。''



By　contagion；　the　people　of　the　provinces　imitated　those　of

Paris；　and　six　to　eight　thousand　Protestants　were　slain。



When　time　had　somewhat　cooled　religious　passions；　all　the

historians；　even　the　Catholics；　spoke　of　St。　Bartholomew's　Day

with　indignation。　　They　thus　showed　how　difficult　it　is　for　the

mentality　of　one　epoch　to　understand　that　of　another。



Far　from　being　criticised；　St。　Bartholomew's　Day　provoked　an

indescribable　enthusiasm　throughout　the　whole　of　Catholic　Europe。



Philip　II。　was　delirious　with　joy　when　he　heard　the　news；　and　the

King　of　France　received　more　congratulations　than　if　he　had　won　a

great　battle。



But　it　was　Pope　Gregory　XIII。　above　all　who　manifested　the

keenest　satisfaction。　　He　had　a　medal　struck　to　commemorate　the

happy　event；＇2＇　ordered　joy…fires　to　be　lit　and　cannon　fired；

celebrated　several　masses；　and　sent　for　the　painter　Vasari　to

depict　on　the　walls　of　the　Vatican　the　principal　scenes　of

carnage。　　Further；　he　sent　to　the　King　of　France　an　ambassador

instructed　to　felicitate　that　monarch　upon　his　fine　action。　　It

is　historical　details　of　this　kind　that　enable　us　to　comprehend

the　mind　of　the　believer。　　The　Jacobins　of　the　Terror　had　a

mentality　very　like　that　of　Gregory　XIII。







＇2＇　The　medal　must　have　been　distributed　pretty　widely；　for　the

cabinet　of　medals　at　the　Bibliotheque　Nationale　possesses

three　examples：　one　in　gold；　one　in　silver；　and　one　in　copper。　

This　medal；　reproduced　by　Bonnani　in　his　Numism。　Pontific。

（vol。　i。　p。　336）；　represents　on　one　side　Gregory　XIII。；　and　on

the　other　an　angel　striking　Huguenots　with　a　sword。　　The　exergue

is　Ugonotorum　strages；　that　is；　Massacre　of　the　Huguenots。　

（The　word　strages　may　be　translated　by　carnage　or　massacre；　a

sense　which　it　possesses　in　Cicero　and　Livy；　or　again　by

disaster；　ruin；　a　sense　attributed　to　it　in　Virgil　and　Tacitus。）







Naturally　the　Protestants　were　not　indifferent　to　such　a

hecatomb；　and　they　made　such　progress　that　in　1576　Henri　III。　was

reduced　to　granting　them；　by　the　Edict　of　Beaulieu；　entire

liberty　of　worship；　eight　strong　places；　and；　in　the　Parliaments；

Chambers　composed　half　of　Catholics　and　half　of　Huguenots。



These　forced　concessions　did　not　lead　to　peace。　　A　Catholic

League　was　created；　having　the　Duke　of　Guise　at　its　head；　and　the

conflict　continued。　　But　it　could　not　last　for　ever。　　We　know　how

Henri　IV。　put　an　end　to　it；　at　least　for　a　time；　by　his

abjuration　in　1593；　and　by　the　Edict　of　Nantes。



The　struggle　was　quieted　but　not　terminated。　　Under　Louis　XIII。

the　Protestants　were　still　restless；　and　in　1627　Richelieu　was

obliged　to　besiege　La　Rochelle；　where　15；000　Protestants

perished。　　Afterwards；　possessing　more　political　than　religious

feeling；　the　famous　Cardinal　proved　extremely　tolerant　toward　the

Reformers。



This　tolerance　could　not　last。　　Contrary　beliefs　cannot　come　into

contact　without　seeking　to　annihilate　each　other；　as　soon　as　one

feels　capable　of　dominating　the　other。　　Under　Louis　XIV。　the

Protestants　had　become　by　far　the　weaker；　and　were　forced　to

renounce　the　struggle　and　live　at　peace。　　Their　number　was　then

about　1；200；000；　and　they　possessed　more　than　600　churches；

served　by　about　700　pastors。　　The　presence　of　these

heretics　on　French　soil　was　intolerable　to　the　Catholic　clergy；

who　endeavoured　to　persecute　them　in　various　ways。　　As　these

persecutions　had　little　result；　Louis　XIV。　resorted　to

dragonnading　them　in　1685；　when　many　individuals　perished；　but

without　further　result。　　Under　the　pressure　of　the　clergy；

notably　of　Bossuett；　the　Edict　of　Nantes　was　revoked；　and　the

Protestants　were　forced　to　accept　conversion　or　to　leave　France。　

This　disastrous　emigration　lasted　a　long　time；　and　is　said　to

have　cost　France　400；000　inhabitants；　men　of　notable　energy；

since　they　had　the　courage　to　listen　to　their　conscience　rather

than　their　interests。





6。　　The　results　of　Religious　Revolutions。





If　religious　revolutions　were　judged　only　by　the　gloomy　story　of

the　Reformation；　we　should　be　forced　to　regard　them　as　highly

disastrous。　　But　all　have　not　played　a　like　part；　the　civilising

influence　of　certain　among　them　being　considerable。



By　giving　a　people　moral　unity　they　greatly　increase　its　material

power。　　We　see　this　notably　when　a　new　faith；　brought　by

Mohammed；　transforms　the　petty　and　impotent　tribes　of　Arabia　into

a　formidable　nation。



Such　a　new　religious　belief　does　not　merely　render　a　people

homogeneous。　　It　attains　a　result　that　no　philosophy；　no　code

ever　attained：　it　sensibly　transforms　what　is　almost

unchangeable；　the　sentiments　of　a　race。



We　see　this　at　the　period　when　the　most　powerful　religious

revolution　recorded　by　history　overthrew　paganism　to　substitute　a

God　who　came　from　the　plains　of　Galilee。　　The　new　ideal　demanded

the　renunciation　of　all　the　joys　of　existence　in　order　to

acquire　the　eternal　happiness　of　heaven。　　No　doubt　such　an　ideal

was　readily　accepted　by　the　poor；　the　enslaved；　the　disinherited

who　were　deprived　of　all　the　joys　of　life　here　below；　to　whom　an

enchanting　future　was　offered　in　exchange　for　a　life　without

hope。　　But　the　austere　existence　so　easily　embraced　by　the　poor

was　also　embraced　by　the　rich。　　In　this　above　all　was　the　power

of　the　new　faith　manifested。



Not　only　did　the　Christian　revolution　transform　manners：　it　also

exercised；　for　a　space　of　two　thousand　years；　a　preponderating

influence　over　civilisation。　　Directly　a　religious　faith　triumphs

all　the　elements　of　civilisation　naturally　adapt　themselves　to

it；　so　that　civilisation　is　rapidly　transformed。　　Writers；

artists　and　philosophers　merely　symbolise；　in　their　works；　the

ideas　of　the　new　faith。



When　any　religious　or　political　faith　whatsoever　has　triumphed；

not　only　is　reason　powerless　to　affect　it；　but　it　even　finds

motives　which　impel　it　to　interpret　and　so　justify　the　faith　in

question；　and　to　strive　to　impose　it　upon　others。　　There　were

probably　as　many　theologians　and　orators　in　the　time　of　Moloch；

to　prove　the　utility　of　human　sacrifices；　as　there　were　at　other

periods　to　glorify　the　Inquisition；　the　massacre　of　St。

Bartholomew；　and　the　hecatombs　of　the　Terror。



We　must　not　hope　to　see　peoples　possessed　by　strong　beliefs

readily　achieve　tolerance。　　The　only　people　who　attained　to

toleration　in　the　ancient　world　were　the　polytheists。　　The

nations　which　practise　toleration　at　the　present　time　are　those

that　might　well　be　termed　polytheistical；　since；　as　in　England

and　America；　they　are　divided　into　innumerable　sects。　

Under　identical　names　they　really　adore　very　different　deities。



The　multiplicity　of　beliefs　which　results　in　such　toleration

finally　results　also　in　weakness。　　We　therefore　come　to　a

psychological　problem　not　hitherto　resolved：　how　to　possess　a

faith　at　once　powerful　and　tolerant。



The　foregoing　brief　explanation　reveals　the　large　part　played　by

religious　revolutions　and　the　power　of　beliefs。　　Despite　their

slight　rational　value　they　shape　history；　and　prevent　the　peoples

from　remaining　a　mass　of　individuals　without　cohesion　or

strength。　　Man　has　needed　them　at　all　times　to　orientate　his

thought　and　guide　his　conduct。　　No　philosophy　has　as　yet

succeeded　in　replacing　them。







CHAPTER　III



THE　ACTION　OF　GOVERNMENTS　IN　REVOLUTIONS



1。　　The　feeble　resistance　of　Governments　in　time　of　Revolution。



Many　modern　nationsFrance；　Spain；　Italy；　Austria；　Poland；

Japan；　Turkey；　Portugal；　&c。have　known　revolutions　within　the

last　century。　　These　were　usually　characterised　by　their

instantaneous　quality　and　the　facility　with　which　the　governments

attacked　were　overthrown。



The　instantaneous　nature　of　these　revolutions　is　explained　by　the

rapidity　of　mental　contagion　due　to　modern　methods　of　publicity。　

The　slight　resistance　of　the　governments　attacked　is　more

surprising。　　It　implies　a　total　inability　to　comprehend　and

foresee　created　by　a　blind　confidence　in　their　own　strength。



The　facility　with　which　governments　fall　is　not　however　a　new

phenomenon。　　It　has　been　proved　more　than　once；　not　only　in

autocratic　systems；　which　are　always　overturned　by　palace

conspiracies；　but　also　in　governments　perfectly　instructed　in　the

state　of　public　opinion　by　the　press　and　their　own　agents。



Among　these　instantaneous　downfalls　one　of　the　most　striking　was

that　which　followed　the　Ordinances　of　Charles　X。　　This　monarch

was；　as　we　know；　overthrown　in　four　days。　　His　minister

Polignac　had　taken　no　measures　of　defence；　and　the　king　was　so

confident　of　the　tranquillity　of　Paris　that　he　had　gone　hunting。　

The　army　was　not　in　the　least　hostile；　as　in　the　reign　of　Louis

XVI。；　but　the　troops；　badly　officered；　disbanded　before　the

attacks　of　a　few　insurgents。



The　overthrow　of　Louis…Philippe　was　still　more　typical；　since　it

did　not　result　from　any　arbitrary　action　on　the　part　of　the

sovereign。　　This　monarch　was　not　surrounded　by　the　hatred　which

finally　surrounded　Charles　X。；　and　his　fall　was　the　result　of　an

insignificant　riot　which　could　easily　have　been　repressed。



Historians；　who　can　hardly　comprehend　how　a　solidly　constituted

government；　supported　by　an　imposing　army；　can　be　overthrown　by　a

few　rioter