170 



right, making the effect prior to the cause. He next proceeds to state 

 what these laws of nature are, deriving them all from his two principles — 

 that naturally every man has a right to every thing, and that all good 

 proceeds from fear, glory, or pride. It is curious to ohserve how the 

 extravagant nominalism which he had adopted from Ockham leads him 

 to confuse between men and things, positive and moral law ; and how 

 in almost every sentence he is obliged to use words such as " ought," 

 " should," " right," " wrong," and others which imply that innate moral 

 obligation which he is so eager to disprove. " The science of these 

 laws of nature" Hobbes concludes to be "the true and only moral 

 philosophy." But to put these laws into execution there must be some 

 personal authority. The plurality of wills must become a unity of will 

 by the mixltitude resohiug their several wills into the absolute wiU of 

 one individual person, or a collective assembly of persons considered as 

 one body ; and as the more perfect this unity is the better, Hobbes 

 becomes an advocate for unlimited monarchy, as being the most 

 natural form of government, " as if eveiy man should say to every man 

 I authorise and give up my right of governijig myself to this man, or 

 assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him 

 and authorise all his actions in like manner. This done the multitude 

 so united in one person is called a commonwealth, in Latin civitas.* 

 This is the generation of that great Leviathan, or rather (to speak more 

 reverently !) of that mortal God to whom we owe, under the immortal 

 God, our peace and defence." . This last sentence is curious, as 

 explanatory of the frontispiece of the book, which represents the great 

 " Leviathan," in the shape of a giant despot, rising with his sword and 

 sceptre iu all the perfection of beauty and power from amidst a sea of 

 men and towns, like a second Venus from the ocean. 



Hobbes next goes on to state that the person in power has an absolute 

 right to that power. Since, according to him, the monarch de facto is 

 the monarch de jure, and having unlimited power over his subjects, it 



* Hobbes's account of the origiu iif a state is this ; — Man and woman meeting together 

 for purposes of natural lust form an otKla or family. A cougregation of such families form 

 a Kti/xT) or town. Laws are drawn up for mutual advantage, and thus arises the ■ir6\is or 

 state ; and from these laws come the feelings of right and property, duly, loyalty, and filial 

 obedience. Very different is the r asouing of Aristotle. He (Polit Lib. 1,) shows that the 

 oiKla met together xPVf^'^^ fveKev fii] f(pr]/ji.€pov, and beasts ouly xP'h'^^^s eVe/cei' 

 f<prififpov, and that the ttoMs was a congregation of these otKtai in the improved form of 

 Kcijxat avrapKetas 'iviKev. Cf. also Coleridge (" Church and State," chap. I,) who maiu- 

 tains that as the idea of the perfect is always prior to the idea of the imperfect, and the idea 

 of the end precedes the conception of tlie means, the idea of unity that of duality, and the 

 idea of genus that of species, so the idea of the state is prior to the idea of man, as it is 

 tlie TeAoj or perfection of his humanity, the full developement of his manhood. 



