236 DANTlv's TREATISE ON GOVERNMENT. 



have less reason for cupidity than lesser kings (c. 13) ; there is- 

 more chance of efficiency if the higher common interests of the 

 race are in the care of one man, leaving smaller matters to princes 

 and municipalities (c. 14) ; concord is best secured by one head 

 (c. 15) ; Scripture speaks of the reign of Augustus, when Christ 

 was born, as " the fulness of time," i.e., the most blessed time;: 

 but then the world was at peace under one monarch (c. 16). 



This bare summary can give no adequate idea of the ability 

 with which Dante defends his thesis. A synopsis is fatal to any 

 but tiic soundest arguments. How manv of our popular manuals- 

 of political wisdom would sur\ ive this ordeal? 



I am far from wishing to hint that there is no real cogency in 

 some of these arguments. Strip some of them of their mediaeval' 

 dress, and you will find their substance in the speeches of the 

 delegates to the Hague Conference in our own dav. We are 

 still searching to-day for a tribunal of international arbitration, 

 and have not had much success in finding one. After two of the 

 most terrible wars in history the last Hague Conference was as 

 unlike a Parliament of Nations as such an assembly could be. 

 And still this was what Dante not only sought, but what his 

 generation to some extent found. They called it monarchy, 

 which it was not ; but at least they found an international arbi- 

 trator. We talk of the Hague tribunal, but its jurisdiction would 

 seem to be very precarious. When Dante used the word monarch 

 it may be doubted whether he meant much more than what we 

 would call a President of the European Confederation. Of 

 course he meant that President to be arrayed in all the trappings 

 of a mediaeval Emperor. Although the natural trend of an 

 Emperor's authority was in opposition to national independence. 

 Dante did not mean it to be so in his scheme. The Court of 

 International Arbitration (if by a great stretch of fancy we can 

 imagine it becoming anything outside the brains of the persons 

 who conceived it) will be the fulfilment of one side of Dante's 

 dream. So far then we may say that a not contemntible part of 

 the political world holds the substance of Dante's theory of 

 Empire, whilst being at a greater distance from its realization. 



Thus far I have onlv considered the first of the three books of 

 which the cie Monarchia is composed. In the second, Dante 

 stoutly maintains that the Roman people, whose heir he believed 

 the Emperor of his day to be, were not only the de facto but the 

 de jure rulers of the world. He finds many arguments for this, 

 and amongst them the natural capacity of this people to rule, 

 and the unselfish wav in which it had discharged its responsi- 

 bilities. We are reminded of the familiar boast of another 

 Empire, nearer home, when we read his quoting with approval' 

 the eulogv contained in Cicero's words : — 



Imoerium reipiiblicne benpfici's tenehatnr non iniuri's; hella aiit pro 

 sociis aut de imnerio aerebantur ; exitiis erant bellorum ant mites aut 

 necessarii ; regum, populonim et nationiim nortus erat et refiigium senatiis. 

 Nostri autem magistratus imperntore?qiie in ea re maxime laudem capere- 

 <;t'H>ier'nt: «i provinrias. si sorios a'qtiitate et fide defendissent. Itaque 

 illud patrocinium orbis terrarum potius quam imperiiim poterat nominari.* 



(* D70fficiiill~%)~-- 



