5 o AR I STOCK A CY AND E VOL UTION 



Book i general character of his conclusions. We have the 



direct evidence of his own categorical statements. 



Let us turn again to the criticism with which, 



as .\ir. spencer as we have already seen, he prefaces his whole 



h?sdi S stina y series of sociological writings, and which may be 



admissions and ^en ^ ^ ls fundamental profession of faith his 



assertions, as 



weii as by the criticism, namely, of what he calls "the great-man 



character of ' \ 



s. theory? his rejection of it as being a theory which 

 would render all social science impossible, and his 

 enunciation of the theory which he contends must 

 take its place. It may seem to some readers that 

 his rejection of the great man as a vera causa which 

 will explain social phenomena amounts to no more 

 than a rejection of that exaggerated view of history 

 which expresses itself in the works of writers such 

 as Froude and Carlyle, and which vaguely attributes 

 all the progressive changes of humanity to the per- 

 sonality of rulers, of political and military autocrats 

 such as Henry VIII., Cromwell, and Frederick 

 the Great of Prussia. And indeed, to judge by 

 Mr. Spencer's language, it is this exaggerated view 

 which has been most frequently present in his 

 mind, as we may see by referring to the passage 

 already quoted, which concludes his demonstration 

 that the ''great-man theory" is false. With the 

 sole exception, he says, of the military struggles of 

 primitive tribes, " new activities, new institutions, 

 new ideas, unobtrusively make their appearance, 

 without the aid of any king or legislator ; and if 

 you wish to understand the phenomena of social 

 evolution, you will not do it should you read yourself 



