MR. SPENCER ON THE MILITARY LEADER 57 



begin to give origin to new activities, new ideas, all Book i 

 of which unobtrusively make their appearance with- 

 out the aid of any king or legislator." 



It will be necessary to deal with these two He admits that 

 contentions separately ; and we will begin with the doef&f somes 

 second, as set forth in the words just quoted. We JJJjJ jJ2' ; 

 shall find it valuable as an example of that singular 

 confusion of thought by which all the reasoning of 

 our sociologists with regard to this question is 

 vitiated. Mr. Spencer speaks of an " immense 

 error" which he is pointing out and correcting. 

 The " immense error" in reality is to be found in his 

 own conception. It is hard to imagine anything 

 more arbitrary and more gratuitously false than the 

 contrast which he here draws between the actions of but denies that 



. . r i r i i i he does any- 



men in primitive war, for the success oi which he th in g excep- 

 admits a great leader to have been essential, and ^y^ 6 



their various actions and activities as manifested P eaceful pro- 

 gress. 



in peaceful progress, which, he contends, neither 

 require leadership nor exhibit traces of its influence. 

 We are at this moment altogether waiving the 

 question of how far the great leader, when he is the 

 proximate cause of the military successes of his tribe, 

 is their cause in any deeper sense. It is enough for 

 us now to take Mr. Spencer's admission that the 

 leader is really the cause, in some sense or other, of 

 the social changes connected jvith early warfare ; 

 and, keeping to this sense, let us consider in what 

 possible way less causality can be attributed to the 

 actions of great men and leaders in the sphere of 

 peaceful progress, 



