THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 167 



all that enormous aggregate of appliances by which these have sever- 

 ally been produced, detonating powder included, we should not regard 

 his interpretation as very rational. But it would fairly compare in 

 rationality with this interpretation of social phenomena which, dwell- 

 ing on the important changes which the great man works, ignores that 

 immense preexisting supply of latent power which he unlocks, and that 

 immeasurable accumulation of antecedents to which both he and this 

 power are due. 



Recognizing what truth there is in the great-man theory of history, 

 we may say that, if limited to early societies, the histories of which 

 are histories of little else than endeavors to destroy or subjugate one 

 another, it approximately expresses the fact in representing the capa- 

 ble leader as all-important ; though even here it leaves out of sight too 

 much the number and the quality of his followers. But its immense 

 error lies in the assumption that what was once true is true forever ; 

 and that a relation of ruler and ruled which was possible and good at 

 one time is possible and good for all time. Just as fast as this preda- 

 tory activity of early tribes diminishes, just as fast as larger aggre- 

 gates are formed by conquest or otherwise, just as fast as war ceases 

 to be the business of the whole male population, so fast do societies 

 begin to develop, to show traces of structures and functions not before 

 possible, to acquire increasing complexity along with increasing size, 

 to give origin to new institutions, new activities, new ideas, sentiments, 

 and habits : all of which unobtrusively make their appearance without 

 the thought of any king or legislator. And if you wish to understand 

 these phenomena of social evolution, you will not do it though you 

 should read yourself blind over the biographies of all the great rulers 

 on record, down to Frederick the Greedy and Napoleon the Treacher- 

 ous. 



In addition to that passive denial of a Social Science implied by 

 these two allied doctrines, one or other of which is held by nine men 

 out of ten, there comes from a few an active denial of it either entire 

 or partial. Reasons are given for the belief that no such thing is pos- 

 sible. The essential invalidity of these reasons can be shown only 

 after the essential nature of Social Science, overlooked by those who 

 make them, has been pointed out ; and to point this out here would be 

 to forestall the argument. Some minor criticisms, may, however, fitly 

 precede the major criticism. Let us consider first the positions taken 

 up by Mr. Froude : 



" When natural causes are liable to be set aside and neutralized by what is 

 called volition, the word Science is out of place. If it is free to a man tochoosG 

 what he will do or not do, there is no adequate science of him. If there is a 

 science of him, there is no free choice, and the praise or blame with which we 

 regard one another is impertinent and out of place." 1 



1 "Short Studies on Great Subjects," vol. L, p. 11. 



