the Greeks were the authors of political liberty, is unsound—they neither practised nor understood liberty, and the external forms mistaken for democracy had no necessary connection with it. Aristotle could not form even a conception of a political system that did not rest upon slavery, and this was doubtless the general condition of the Greek mind. It was merely accidental that the Greek States assumed a democratic form, or rather approximated to a democratic form; but while they were utterly ignorant of individual relations they certainly had clear views of the relations of states and the duties that independent communities owe to each other. The Asiatic nations seem to have had no conception whatever of these duties—conquest or slavery were the only alternatives. A nation must conquer or be conquered—a dynasty must destroy all others, or expect to fall itself—and the Asiatic character still partakes largely of these habitudes. Except, therefore, in the mere externals or outward arrangements of political society, the Greeks can hardly be said to have done anything for political liberty or to advance political science. The Romans did more—vastly more—but they had little or no conception of democracy or of individual liberty. The proud boast, “I am a Roman citizen,” unlike the idea of the American democrat, partook of the spirit of a British aristocrat of our own days, claiming the privileges of his order. The men who founded the city of Rome, though doubtless fillibusters and adventurers, perhaps even outcasts of the neighboring populations, were assumed to be superior to the later emigrants, and their descendants especially claimed exclusive privileges. And when Rome expanded into a mighty empire and ruled the world, the senatorial order ruled the empire—at all events, until Cæsar crossed the Rubicon and seized the supreme power. The change from a republic to an empire had little or no bearing upon the question of liberty, for the condition of the great body of the people remained the same. Rome conquered all, or nearly all, the then known world, for, except the Persians, and perhaps some few populations in the far North, the whole Caucasian race recognized the Romans as their rulers. The Parthians, so often waging desperate war with the Romans, were doubtless a mixed people, something like the modern Turks, and very possibly their ancestors. Following the rude code of early times, the Romans enslaved the conquered populations. All the prisoners of war were deemed to have forfeited their lives, and were parceled out among the Roman conquerors, while the rural populations were compelled to pay tribute to the Roman civil officers. It is quite probable that the Romans conquered some of the inferior races, but except the Numidians, Lybians, Ethiopians, etc., of Africa, Roman writers are silent on the subject. It has been said that the history of the Romans was the history of the Caucasian race, and that was the history of the world.