the origin of Rome from sources of this kind, insisting upon its gradual formation, "the founding of a City, in the strict sense, such as the legend assumes, being of course to be reckoned altogether out of the question."

Grote gives an interesting account of the growth of Greek Cities from the same family or tribal root. He describes at great length the social groups which were thus formed, and says "all these phratric and gentile associations, the larger as well as the smaller, were founded upon the same principles and tendencies of the Grecian mind- a coalescence of the idea of worship with that of ancestry or of communion in certain special religious rites with communion of blood real or supposed." There was “a successive subordination in the scale of the families to the gens-the gentes to the phratry--the phratries to the tribe." The formation of the City proper arose, by gradual and not definitely traceable growth, either from the increase of the original cantons or by the union of different village communities anxious to acquire the advantages and the dignities derivable from City life. "In the village there was no room for that expansion of the social and political feelings to which protected intra mural residence and increased numbers gave birth : there was no consecrated acropolis, or agora---no ornamental temples and porticos, exhibiting the continued offerings of successive generations-no theatre for music or recitation-no gymnasium for athletic exercises-none of those fixed arrangements for transacting public business with regularity and decorum, which the Greek citizen with his powerful sentiment of locality deemed essential to a dignified existence.”

The establishment and the growth of Cities marks therefore the action of an important element in human progress, involving on the one side benefits conferred by society on individuals, and on the other side new moral duties to be performed by the individual. Looking at City life at the time when it was the highest and furthest development of the social and political wants and tendencies of mankind, this double influence is of all-absorbing interest. What the City could do was, first to afford the

protection of shelter and defence by the co-operation of its citizens, and by the creation of such works of fortification as could be accomplished only by joint action working under acknowledged authority for a common object. A condition precedent to material and intellectual development was hereby effected. It was only when life and property were thus protected that wealth beyond the mere physical requirements of the day could be accumulated, and that time could be given for the commencement of that culture which depends upon social intercourse, upon the sharpening of mind by contact with mind, and for the excitement to thought and invention which the new circumstances demanded. Domestic and industrial arts became possible and necessary, producing the improvement of tools and instruments alike for peace and war ; the birth of new wants and the means for supplying them; and, finally the appearance of those noblest of all arts whereby human thought is perpetuated, and in speech, in writing, in drawing, in sculpture, in music, leaves records of past achievments and models for future progress.

The ideal of what city life could do for its people is formulated in the most noble manner by Pericles, in his celebrated funeral oration over the Athenian citizens who fell at the beginning of the Peloponesian War. Grote gives a vivid summary of this noteworthy speech, and points out how "impressive is his sketch of that multitude of concurrent impulses which at this time agitated and impelled the Athenian mind-the strength of one not implying the weakness of the remainder: the relish for all pleasures of Art and elegance, and the appetite for intellectual expansion, coinciding in the same bosom, with energetic promptitude as well as endurance: abundance of recreative spectacles, yet noway abating the cheerfulness of obedience even to the hardest calls of patriotic duty that combination of reason and courage which encountered danger the more willingly from having discussed and calculated it beforehand lastly, an anxious interest as well as a competency of judgment, in public discussion and public action, common to every citizen rich and poor, and combined with every

man's own private industry. So comprehensive an ideal of manysided social development, bringing out the capacities for action and endurance, as well as those for enjoyment, would be sufficiently remarkable, even if we supposed it only existing in the imagination of a philosopher; but it becomes still more so when we recollect that the main features of it, at least, were drawn from the fellow citizens of the speaker. "

It is desirable that we should constantly call to mind-that the result which we see in the fully organised City, in Athens and in Rome, is not the realisation of any pre-conceived idea, deliberately worked out by sustained conscious effort, but is the consequence of slow growth and development. We can see nothing of the first-centuries of this growth. When trustworthy chronology first dealt with Athens and Rome, it found them actual cities, with gradations of Society, with division of social functions, with a government established, and a sort of constitution formulated. The cities had to create the Arts by which a record of their history was made possible. We must remember that human progress in the past has been a matter of growth, in order that we may trust with patience to the action of the same agency in the future. The rate of progress may be accelerated by the accumulated power of past efforts, by the facilities for acquiring and diffusing knowledge, by the higher mental and physical capacities which generations of culture have produced, but the process however quickened is still one of growth and not of isolated creative acts.

The individual duties which were called into action by this phase of social existence deserve careful notice. The primal social study of all, that of obedience to authority, was in operation in those earlier stages of human development which preceded the formation of cities. Obedience was rendered in the family to the patriarch, in the tribe to the chief. But that higher quality of willing and intelligent obedience, not to an arbitrary master, but to an authority voluntarily chosen or accepted, and to constituted law, that postponement of the individual desire to the general welfare; they were the results of the relations closer and yet wider reaching

which are involved in the formation and in the growth of cities. So too was the acceptance of the gradation of classes and the variety of function, which in the agricultural tribe were unnecessary, but in the more complicated organisation were essential. But the most important of all branches of the study in which we are engaged is that of the formation and growth of morality; to trace the extent to which, and the processes by which, the purely selfish feelings, the desire to gain an individual end, and to secure the gratification of an immediate individual desire, are taught or made to give way to a consideration of the rights, and to the wish to increase the happiness of others. City life forms a striking part in this enquiry. It marks the out-going of the sympathies, the affections, the consciousness of duty-owing, to a circle much wider than that which at first restricted them. The affection of one member of a family to another is a little but only a little removed from that of selfish desire for one's own pleasure. It is the first and most instinctive form of morality. The extension of any part of this feeling to the members of the tribe, where, although the general idea of blood relationship exists, the terms of actual association are less intimate, is a step in advance. When the social circle is extended so as to embrace several tribes of the same stock in joint operations either industrial or defensive, a further advance is made, and this is the state to which public morality had reached when Cities were first formed. Their effect was not only to broaden the bases of morality-merging the idea of kinship into the wider and less personal one of citizenship; but by degrees it almost infinitely increased the occasions on which self had to be subordinated, and the claims and the rights of others had to be recognised.

The limitations within which the political idea of the City operated became afterwards obstacles or hindrances to further progress; but at first they marked not a narrowing or restriction of social life and morality but a wide extension of them. The idea of the City did not conflict with that of the nation but pre ceded it. All that was possible to the Greek 600 years B.C. in

the way of patriotic devotion, of disciplined joint action, of unselfish affection and exertion, of intellectual aspiration, of artistic culture, found its full and complete development in his city. To us this seems a narrower range than his sympathies and his energies might have found, that it contained elements which forbad the extension and was fatal to the permanence of the state. But the Greek has to be judged not by the subsequent ideas of a future to which he did not aspire, but to the conditions of the past from which he had so grandly emerged.

It is nevertheless true that the limitations did exist, and that in the end they became injurious. The very nearness of the City to the Citizen whilst it gave a passionate force to his patriotism, narrowed and often embittered his feelings towards neighbouring communities, the people of which might have been fellow countrymen, but became rivals and enemies. Nor whilst the exclusive City ideal existed could a nation be created. Greece was not a nation but a number of partly formed nations competing with, and fighting against, each other. When Athens strove to found a Colonial Empire, connected by mutual obligations and working for mutual ends, what she succeeded in doing was to establish or to strengthen a series of City Communities each of which strove to realise for itself the Hellenic idea of a City independent and self-contained. Thus nationality as distinct from municipality was not possible either by the accretion of existing units, or by the growth from a common centre.

There was another way in which the comparative narrowness of the sphere of political activities had evil tendencies. The personal jealousies and rivalries of neighbours added bitterness to the animosities of opposing statesmen, and struggles like that between Kleon and Nikias would have been less violent in themselves and certainly less dangerous to their country, if their scene had been a national assembly in which diverse provinces and communities were represented, instead of a City assembly in which all present were close personal friends, adherents, or partizans of one or other combatant. Quarrels-which would not have seriously