An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolongedPlayfair, William
Philosophy
An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolonged
Playfair, William
Economics; Great Britain -- Economic conditions; History -- Philosophy
---
{29} This conduct appears the more admirable to those who live in the
present times that in the revolutionary war with the French, who
invented a number of new methods of fighting, and had recourse to
new stratagems, the regular generals opposed to them never altered
their modes of warfare, but let themselves be beat in the most regular
way possible. One single general (the Archduke Charles) did not think
himself above the circumstances of the case, and his success was
proportioned to his merit.
{30} The copying the form and structure of a Carthaginian galley that
was stranded.
-=-
[end of page #31]
It has been a favourite opinion among many writers on political
economy that artists and workmen are cowardly and unfit for soldiers;
but experience does not warrant that conclusion; though it is certain
that, according to the manner the Romans carried on war, the bodily
fatigue was greater than men bred up promiscuously to trades of
different sorts could in general undergo.
So long as the Romans had enemies to contend with, from whom they
obtained little, the manners and laws, the mode of education, and the
government of their country, remained pure as at first. Their business,
indeed, became more easy; for the terror of their name, their
inflexibility, and the superior means they had of bringing their powers
into action, all served to facilitate their conquests. But when they
conquered Carthage, and begun =sic= to taste the fruits of wealth,
their ground-work altered by degrees, and the superstructure became
less solid. {31}
Wealth, as we have already seen, was confined to Asia and Africa, and
of it the Carthaginians possessed a great share. It has long been the
opinion adopted by writers on those subjects that the Carthaginians, as
being a commercial and a trading nation, were quite an unequal match
for the Romans; that in Rome all was virtue, public spirit, and every
thing that was great and noble, while at Carthage all was venal, vile,
and selfish. A spirit of war and conquest reigned, say they, in one
place together with a spirit of glory, in the other a spirit of gain
presided over private actions and public counsels.
This is all very true, and very well said, with respect to the fact, but
with respect to the cause there is one of the greatest errors into which
a number of men of discernment and ability have ever fallen. {32}
The true state of the case is easily to be understood, if we only
---
{31} It will be seen, in the subsequent part of this inquiry, that, in the
present mode of warfare, the Romans would not have had equal
advantage.--Skill, and not personal strength, is now the great object,
and money to purchase arms and ammunition is the next.
{32} M. Montesquieu, notwithstanding his very superior knowledge,
accuracy, and acuteness, enlarges upon this subject; and never takes
any notice of the corrupt, mercenary, and degraded state into which
Rome fell when it became as rich as Carthage.
-=-
[end of page #32]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account