triarchal； the tribal； and the Asiatic monarchical systems； there is； properly speaking； no state； no citizens； and the organization is economical rather than political。 Authorityeven the nation itselfis personal； not territorial。 The patriarch； the chief of the tribe； or the king； is the only proprietor。 Under the Graeco…Roman system all this is transformed。 The nation is territorial as well as personal； and the real proprietor is the city or state。 Under the Empire； no doubt； what lawyers call the eminent domain was vested in the emperor； but only as the representative and trustee of the city or state。
When or by what combination of events this transformation was effected； history does not inform us。 The first…born of Adam； we are told； built a city； and called it after his son 31 Enoch； but there is no evidence that it was constituted a municipality。 The earliest traces of the civil order proper are found in the Greek and Italian republics； and its fullest and grandest developments are found in Rome； imperial as well as republican。 It was no doubt preceded by the patriarchal system； and was historically developed from it； but by way of accretion rather than by simple explication。 It has in it an element that； if it exists in the patriarchal constitution； exists there only in a different form； and the transformation marks the passage from the economical order to the political； from the barbaric to the civil constitution of society； or from barbarism to civilization。
The word civilization stands opposed to barbarism； and is derived from civitascity or state。 The Greeks and Romans call all tribes and nations in which authority is vested in the chief； as distinguished from the state； barbarians。 The origin of the word barbarian； barbarus； or 。。。。。。。。； is unknown； and its primary sense can be only conjectured。 Webster regards its primary sense as foreign； wild； fierce； but this could not have been its original sense； for the Greeks and Romans never termed all foreigners barbarians； and they applied the 32 term to nations that had no inconsiderable culture and refinement of manners； and that had made respectable progress in art and sciencesthe Indians； Persians； Medians； Chaldeans； and Assyrians。 They applied the term evidently in a political； not an ethical or an aesthetical sense； and as it would seem to designate a social order in which the state was not developed； and in which the nation was personal； not territorial； and authority was held as a private right； not as a public trust； or in which the domain vests in the chief or tribe； and not in the state； for they never term any others barbarians。
Republic is opposed not to monarchy； in the modern European sense； but to monarchy in the ancient or absolute sense。 Lacedaemon had kings； yet it was no less republican than Athens； and Rome was called and was a republic under the emperors no less than under the consuls。 Republic； respublica； by the very force of the term； means the public wealth； or； in good English； the commonwealth； that is； government founded not on personal or private wealth； but on the public wealth； public territory； or domain； or a Government that vests authority in the nation； and attaches the nation to a certain definite territory。 France； Spain； Italy； Holland； Belgium； Denmark； even Great 33 Britain in substance though not in form； are all； in the strictest sense of the word； republican states； for the king or emperor does not govern in his own private right； but solely as representative of the power and majesty of the state。 The distinctive mark of republicanism is the substitution of the state for the personal chief； and public authority for personal or private right。 Republicanism is really civilization as opposed to barbarism； and all civility； in the old Sense of the word； or Civilian in Italian； is republican； and is applied in modern tiles to breeding or refinement of manners； simply because these are characteristics of a republican； or polished ＇from 。。。。。； city＇ people。 Every people that has a real civil order； or a fully developed state or polity； is a republican people； and hence the church and her great doctors when they speak of the state as distinguished from the church； call it the republic； as may be seen by consulting even a late Encyclical of Pius IX。； which some have interpreted wrongly in an anti…republican sense。
All tribes and nations in which the patriarchal system remains； or is developed without transformation； are barbaric； and really so regarded by all Christendom。 In civilized nations the patriarchal authority is transformed into 34 that of the city or state； that is； of the republic； but in all barbarous nations it retains its Private and personal character。 The nation is only the family or tribe； and is called by the name of its ancestor； founder； or chief； not by a geographical denomination。 Race has not been supplanted by country； they are a people； not a state。 They are not fixed to the soil； and though we may find in them ardent love of family； the tribe； or the chief； we never find among them that pure love of country or patriotism which so distinguished the Greeks and Romans； and is no less marked among modern Christian nations。 They have a family； a race； a chief or king； but no patria； or country。 The barbarians who overthrew the Roman Empire； whether of the West or the East； were nations； or confederacies of nations； but not states。 The nation with them was personal； not territorial。 Their country was wherever they fed their flocks and herds； pitched their tents； and encamped for the night。 There were Germans； but no German state； and even to…day the German finds his 〃father…land〃 wherever the German speech is spoken。 The Polish； Sclavonian； Hungarian； Illyrian； Italian； and other provinces held by German states； in which the German language is not the mother…tongue； are excluded from 35 the Germanic Confederation。 The Turks； or Osmanlis； are a race； not a state； and are encamped； not settled； on the site of the Eastern Roman or Greek Empire。
Even when the barbaric nations have ceased to be nomadic； pastoral； or predatory nations； as the ancient Assyrians and Persians or modern Chinese； and have their geographical boundaries； they have still no state； no country。 The nation defines the boundaries； not the boundaries the nation。 The nation does not belong to the territory； but the territory to the nation or its chief。 The Irish and Anglo…Saxons； in former times； held the land in gavelkind； and the territory belonged to the tribe or sept； but if the tribe held it as indivisible； they still held it as private property。 The shah of Persia holds the whole Persian territory as private property； and the landholders among his subjects are held to be his tenants。 They hold it from him； not from the Persian state。
The public domain of the Greek empire is in theory the private domain of the Ottoman emperor or Turkish sultan。 There is in barbaric states no republic； no commonwealth； authority is parental； without being tempered by parental affection。 The chief is a despot； and rules with the united authority of the 36 father and the harshness of the proprietor。 He owns the land and his subjects。
Feudalism； established in Western Europe after the downfall of the Roman Empire； however modified by the Church and by reminiscences of Graeco…Roman civilization retained by the conquered； was a barbaric constitution。 The feudal monarch； as far as he governed at all； governed as proprietor or landholder； not as the representative of the commonwealth。 Under feudalism there are estates； but no state。 The king governs as an estate； the nobles hold their power as an estate； and the commons are represented as an estate。 The whole theory of power is； that it is an estate； a private right； not a public trust。 It is not without reason； then that the common sense of civilized nations terms the ages when it prevailed in Western Europe barbarous ages。
It may seem a paradox to class democracy with the barbaric constitutions； and yet as it is defended by many stanch democrats； especially European democrats and revolutionists； and by French and Germans settled in our own country； it is essentially barbaric and anti…republican。 The characteristic principle of barbarism is； that power is a private or personal right； and when democrats assert that the elective fran… 37 chise is a natural right of man； or that it is held by virtue of the fact that the elector is a man； they assert the fundamental principle of barbarism and despotism。 This says nothing in favor of restricted suffrage； or against what is called universal suffrage。 To restrict suffrage to property…holders helps nothing； theoretically or practically。 Property has of itself advantages enough； without clothing its holders with exclusive political rights and privileges； and the laboring classes any day are as trustworthy as the business classes。 The wise statesman will never restrict suffrage； or exclude the poorer and more numerous classes from all voice in the government of their country。 General suffrage is wise； and if Louis Philippe had had the sense to adopt it； and thus rally the whole nation to the support of his government； he would never have had to encounter the revolution of 1848。 The barbarism； the despotism； is not in universal suffrage； but in defending the elective franchise as a private or personal right。 It is not a private； but a political right； and； like all political rights； a public trust。 Extremes meet； and thus it is that men who imagine that they march at the head of the human race and lead the civilization of the age； are really in principle retrograding to the 38 barbarism of the past； or taking their place with nations on whom the light of civilization has never yet dawned。