Chapter 5
Benjamin Constant, from
"The Liberty of the
Ancients Compared with
That of the Moderns" ( I B19)
SpeechGiven at the Ath6n6e
Royal in Paris
Gentlemen,
I wish to submit for your attention a fbw distinctions, sriil rather nen', befiveen two kinds
of libertl': tl-rese differences have thus far
remained unnoticed, or at least insufficientll,
remarked. The first is the liberty the exercise
of rvhich \\'as so dear to the ancient peoples;
the second the one the enjoyment of v'hich is
especially precious to the modern nations. If I
am right, this investigation u'ill prove inter
esting fiom nvo different angles.
Firsdl'', the confusion of these two kinds of
liberty has been amongst us, in the all too
fhmous days of our revolution, the cause of
many an evil. France was exhausted by useless
experiments, the authors of which, irritated by
their poor success,sought to lbrce her to enjoy
the good she did not want) and denied her the
good which she did want.
Secondly, called as \\,.e are by our happi.
revolution (I call it h"ppl', despite its excesses,
beca use I corrcen tr at e m y at t ent ion on it s
resuits) to enjoy the benefits ofrepresentative
gove rnme nt, it is cur ious and int er es dng r o
discover rvhy this fbrrn of government, the
only one in the shelter of nhich lve could find
some freedom and peace today, was totaily
unknor.vn to the fre e nations of antiquity.
I know that there are writers who have
claimed to distinguish traces of it among some
ancient peoples, in the Lacedaemonian republic fbr example, or amongst our ancestors the
Gauls; but they are mistaken.
The Lacedaemonian government was a
monasdc aristocracv.and in no way a repre
sentative government. The power of the kings
was limited, but it was limited by the ephors,
and not by rnen invested with a mission similar
to that which election confers today on the
defenders of our iibcrties. The ephors, no
doubt, though originally created by the kings,
were elected b,v the people. But there were
onlv five of them. Their authority was as much
religious as political; they even shared in the
administration of government, that is, in the
executive power. Thus their prerogative, Iike
that of ahnost all popular magistrates in the
ancient republics, fhr from being simply a
barrier against tyranny, became sometimes
itself an insuffbrable tyranny.
The regime of the Gauls, which quite
resembled the one that a certain party would
like to restore to us. was at the same time
theocratic and warlike. The priests enjoyed
unlimited
power. The rnilitary class or
nobiliry had markedly insolent and oppressive
16
Neqatipe nnd Positiye Freedoru
privileges; the people had no rights and no
safeguards.
In Rome the tribunes had, up to a poinr, a
representative mission. Thet. $.ere the organs
of those plebeians lvhom the oligarchy - r.r.hich
is the same in all ages- had submitted, in overthrow'ing the kings, to so harsh a sla','erli The
people, horvever, exercised a large part of the
political rights directl),. The"v mct to \/ore on
the lalr's end to judge the patricians against
rvhom charges had becn levelled: thus there
rvere, in Rome, only fbeble traces of a repre sentative system.
This system is a discoverv of the moderns,
and you will see,Gendemen, that the condition
of the human race in antiquity did not allorv lbr
the introduction or establishment of an institution of this nature. The ancient people could
ne ithcr fe el the n c c d f or ir , nor appr ec iat eir s
advantages.Their social organization led them
to desire an entirely diflbrent licedom fiorn the
one rvhich this system grants to us.
Tonight's lecture will be devote d ro
demonstrating this truth to you.
First ask yourselves, Gentlemen, w.hat an
Englishman, a Frenchman, and a citizen of the
United States of America understand toda,v bv
the word 'liberw'.
For each of them it is the right to be sub
jected or-rly to the larvs, and to be neither
arrested, detained, put to death or maltreated
in ar-rytvay by the arbitrar-v r.vill of one or more
individuals. It is the right of everlrone to
express their opinion, choose a profbssion and
practise it, to dispose of properq,, and et.en to
abuse it; to comc and go rvithout permission,
and r'vithout hal.ing to accounr for their
rnotives or undertakings. It is everyone 's right
to associate r,r..ithother individuals, either to
discusstheir interests, or to profbss tire religion
r'vhicir the,v and their associates pref'er, or e\ren
simplv to occupy their days or hours in a rv:r1.
r,r'hich is most compatible r.r.ith their inclina,
tions or r,vhims.Finall,v it is evervone's right to
exercise some influence on the administration
of the gove rnment, either bi, electing all or particular officials, or through representations,
petitions, demanclsto lr'hich the authorities are
nlore or less compelled to pay heed. Norv
compare this liberty rvith that of the ancients.
The latter consisted in exercising collectivelr,.,but directl1,, several parts of the complete sovereignw; in deliberating, in the public
square, over war and pcace; in fonning
a l l i a n c e su i t h l o r e i g n g o v e r n n r c n t s : i n v o t i n g
laws, in pronouncing judgements; in examining the accounts, the acts, the stewardship of
the magistrates; in calling rhem to appear in
front of the assembled people, in accusing,
condemning or absolving them. But if this rvas
r'vhat the ancients called libertv. thel' n4trli,,.O
as compatible r.r'ith this collecti.,'e treedorn the
cornplete subjection of the individual to the
authority of the communitl'. You find among
them almost none of the enjoyments u'hich u'e
have just seen form part of the libertv of the
modems. All private actions rvere submitted to
a sc\reresr.rrveillance.No importance r.as given
to individual independence, neither in relation
to opinions, nor to labour, nor, above all, to
religion. The right to choose one's ou'n reiigious aff,liation, a right rvhich we regard as one
of the most precious, rvould have scemed to
the ancients a crime and a sacrilege. In the
domains rvhich seem to us the most useftil, the
authoritv of the social bodv interposed itself
and obstructed the r,r,illof individuals. Among
the Spartans, Therpandrus cor-rld r-rot add a
string to his lvre u'ithor-rt causing oftbnce to the
ephors. In the most domestic of relations the
public ar.rthority again intcrvenecl. The young
Lacedaemonian could not visit his ner.v bride
fieelr.. In Rome, the censors cast a searching
eve o\.er family life . The larvs rcgulated
customs) and as custonts touch on everything,
there u.as hardly anvthins rhat the laws did not
regulate.
Thus among thc ancienrs the individual,
almost alu'avs soveleigr-rin public affairs, rl'as
a slave in all his priiatc rclatior-rs.
As tr citizen,
he decided ()n perce lnd n ar; as private indi
vicl,ral, he \\ i1s constr,rined, n.atched and
represserl ir-r all his l-novernents; as a member
of the collectivc borlr', he ir.rterrogated,disr-r-rissctl.
con.1cmnet1,beggared, exilecl, or senr c n \ c \ l r ( , . l c . r i h l r i r n r . r g i s t r a t c sa n d s u p c r i o r s ;
Negnt'ive ond Positipe Freedow
as a subject of the collective body he cor-rld
himself be deprived of his status, stripped of
his privileges, banished, put to death, b.v the
discretionarl' u'ill of the rvhole to rvhich he
belonged. Among the modems, on the contrar\', the individual, independent in his private
lifb, is, el'en in the fieest of states, sovereign
onlr, in appearance. His sovereignn, is re
stricted and ahnost alr.a},5 511sp.nded. If, at
fixed and rare intervals, in r.r'hich he is again
surrounded by precautions and obstacles, he
exercises this sovereigntv, it is ahr.ar.s on1,v to
renounce it.
I must at this point, Gentlemen, pause fbr a
moment to anticipate an objection $'hich ma),
bc ad.lresscdto me . Thcre sas in anuquin .r
republic u'here the enslavement of ir-rdividual
existence to the collective bod1. 11'nr l-rot i1s
complete as I have described it. This republic
was the most falnous of all: r.ou r.r'illguess that
I am speaking of Athens. I shall return to it
later, and in subscribing to the truth of this
fhct, I shall also indicate its cause. We shall see
lvhy,, of all the ancient states, Athens was the
one u'hich most resembles the modern ones.
Everl.rvhere else social jurisdiction rvas unlimited. The ancients, as Condorcet sa\rs,h"O t-to
r-rotion of individual rights. Men \\.ere) so to
speak, mereit. machines, u,hose gears and cogu'heels were regulated b1' the lau'. The same
subjection characterized the golden centuries
of the Roman repr.rblic; dre individual was
in some u.alr letl in the natiol, the citizen i'
the ciq'.
We shall no\\r trace this essential diffbrence
betrveen the ancients and ourselves back to its
source.
All ancient republics rvere restricted to a
narro\v territory. The most populous, the most
porverful, the most substantial among them,
$'as not equal ir-r extension to the smallest of
modern states.As an iner..itableconsequence of
their narrorv territorl., the spirit of these
republics u.as bcllicose; each people incessantlv
attacked their neighbolrrs or \\ras attacked b1,
t hem. Thu s d riren bv nec c s s in agaius t one
another, the1,fbught or threatened each other
constanthr Those u.ho had no ambition to be
I7
conquerors, could still not la,v down their
\\'eapons, lest they should themselves bc con
quered. All had to buy their security, their
independence, their u'hole existence at the
price of r.r.'ar.
This rvas the constant interest, the
almost habitual occupation of the free states of
antiquity. Finall1,,by an equally necessaryrcsult
ofthis rvay ofbeing, all these states had slaves.
The mechanical professions and even, among
some nations, the industrial ones, were com
mitted to people in chains.
The modern r.r'orld otTers us a completelv
opposing vie.,v.The smallest states of our dav
are incomparabiy larger than Sparta or than
Rome lvas over five centuries. Even the division of Europe into several states is, thanks to
the progress of enlightemlent) more apparent
than real. While each people, in the past,
formed an isoiated famill', the born enemv of
other families, a rlass of hr-rman beings nor,v
exists, that under diffbrent names and under
different forms of social organization are
essentially homogeneous ir-rtheir nature . This
mass is strong enough to have nothing to fear
fiom barbarian hordes. It is sufficiently civi
lized to find -,1'ara burden. Its uniftrrm ten
denc_vis tou'ards peace.
This difference leads to another one. War
precedes commerce. War and commerce are
onlv tw'o diffbrent means of achieving the
same end, that of getting n'hat one rvants.
Commerce is sirnplv a tribute paid to the
strength of the possessor by the aspirant to
possession. It is an attempt to conquer, bv
mutual agreement, rvhat one can no longer
hope to obtain through vioience. A man rvho
rvas aiu'a,vsthe stronger rvouid never conceive
the idea of commerce. It is experience, b1,
proving to him that u.ar, that is the use of
his strength against the strength of others,
exposes him to a variew of obstacles and
defeats, that leads him to resort to commerce)
that is to a rnilder and surer means of engag
ing the interest of others to agree to."vhat suits
his ollrr. War is all impulse, commerce, calculation. l{ence it fbllor.r'sthat an age must come
in u.hich commerce reolaces lvar. We have
reached this age.
IB
Negatite nncl Positipe Freedoru
I do not ntean that amoltgst the ancients
there were no trading peoples. Br-rt these
peoples were to some degree an exception to
the general rule. The limits of this lecture do
not allow me to il|-rstrate all the obstacles
r,vhich then opposed the progress of commerce; ,vou knor.r' them as r,vell as I do; I shall
only mention one of them.
Their ignorance of the compass meant that
the sailors of antiquitl' ah.vavshad to keep close
to the coast. To pass through the pillars of
I{ercules, that is, the straits of Gibraltar, rvas
considered the most daring of enterprises. The
Phoenicians and the Carthaginians, rhe most
able of navigators, did not risk it until vcrv
Iate, and their example tbr long remained
without imitators. In Athens, of n,hich u'e
shall talk so on , the int er es t or r m ar it im c c nt er prises rvas around 60 percent, r,vhile current
interest rvas only 12 percent: that rvas horv
dangerous the idea of distant navigation
seemed.
Moreover, if I couid permit myself a digression which u.ould unfbrtunatelv prove too
Iong, I r.vould shor,r'you, Gentlemen, through
the details of the custorrts) habits, u,a\, of
trading r,vith others of the trading peoples of
antiquity, that their commerce was itself
impregnated bi, the spirit of the age, b)' the
atmosphere of r.var and hostiiir.v which sur
rounded it. Commerce then was a luck1, nccident, todav it is the normai state of things, the
only aim, the universal tendencl', the true life
of nations. They u'ant repose, and u'ith repose
comfbrt, and as a source of comfort, industrl'.
Every day '"var becomes a more ineffbctive
means of satisfying their wishes. Its hazards no
longer oflbr to individuals benefits that match
the results of peaceful u,ork and regular
exchanges. Among the ancients, a successful
rvar increased both private and public rvealth
in siaves,tributes and lands shared out. For the
moderns, even a successiul rvar costs intbllibly
more than it is r,vorth.
Finally. thanks to commerce, ro religion, to
the n-roral and intellectual progress of the
human race) there are no longer slavesamong
the European nations. Free men must exercise
all profbssions, provide fbr all the needs of
socieqv.
It is easv to sce, Gentlcnten, the inevitable
outcorre of these diflbrences.
Firsdy, the size of a countrv calrsesa corre
sponding decrease of the politrc;rl ir-nportance
allotted to each inclividual. The most obscure
republican of Sparta or Rome hacl power.
The same is not true of the simple citizen of
Britain or of the United States. His pcrsonal
influence is an imperceptible pi.rrt of the social
r.vill rvhich impresscs on the sor,ernments its
dire ction.
Secondl"', the abolition of slaverv has
deprived the fiee populatron of ell the leisure
u'hich resulted liom the fhct rhlr slaves rook
care of most of the n.ork. \\,-ithout the slave
population ofAthens, 20,000 Athenians could
never have spent everv dar' ,rt the public square
in discussions.
Thirdlv. commerce docs rrot, like nar, leave
in men's lives intervals of inactivinr The
c()nstant exercise of politicirl rights, the dailv
discussion of the affairs of the stirte, disagreements, confabr-rlations, thc u-hole cntollrage
and rnovemer-it of flctior-rs, necessarv agitations, the cornpulsorr. filling, if I may use
the term, of the lifb of the peoples of
u'ho,
antiquin',
u.ithout
this
resollrce
rvould have languishcd under rhe rveight of
painful inaction, u'ould onlv cause trouble
and fatigr,re to moclern nations, u'here each
individuai, occupied n'ith his specularions,
his enterprises, the pleasures he obtains or
hopes for, does not rvish to bc distracted fron-r
them other than momentaril'u.,and as Iittle as
possible.
Finall,v, commerce inspires in men a vivid
love of individual independence. Commerce
supplies their neecls, satisfies their desires,
vyithout the intervention of the authorities.
This intervention is almost alu'avs - and I do
not know I'h1, I say almost - this intervention
is indeed alu.ays a trouble and an embarrassment. Ever\. time collective po\\'er rvishes to
n-reddle u.itl-r private speculations, it harasses
the speculators. Et'ery time governments
pretend. to do our orvn business, thel' do it
Negative nitd Posi.tiveFreedotu
to'.
more incompetenth. ar-rdexpensivell' ,1-tut-t
"r'oulci.
I said, Ger-rtlemen, that I u'or.rld return to
Athens, u4rose example might be opposed tcr
some of mv assertions, but u'hich u'ill in fact
confirm all of them.
Ather-rs,as I have alreadl' pointed out, \\'as
of ali the Greek republics the most closelr,
engaged in trade: thus it allo-"r'edto its citizer-rs
... :-c..:+^ r,
:l r- r dirit lual liber r V r h. r n
r
5l ldr \
Sparta or Rome . If I could enter into historical details, I u'ould shorv vou that, among the
Athenians, comrnerce had removed ser.eral
of the differences r'r,hich distinguished the
ancient from the modern peoples. The spirit
of the Ather-rian merchants u'as similar to that
of the merchants of our dar,s. Xenophon tells
us that during the Peloponnesian r'r'ar, thcv
moved their capitals fron.r the continent of
Attica to place them on the islands of the
archipelago. Commerce had created among
them the circulation of monev. In Isocrates
therc are signs that bills of exchange $'ere
used. Obsen'e hovn' their customs resemble
our ()\\''n. In their relations u.ith rvomen, yotr
r.r'illsee, again I cite Xenophon, husbands, satisfied rvhen peace and a decorous fiiendship
reignecl in their households, make allou'ances
for the rvilb u'ho is too vulnerable betbre the
Q'rann1,of nature , closc their eves to the irre
sistible por'r.'er of passions, forgivc the first
u'eakness and fbrget the second. In their relations u'ith strangers, u.e shall see them extending the rights of citizenship to u'hoever rvould,
b,v moving among them rvitl-r his famill', estab
iish some trade or industrv. Finally, r'e shali be
struck by their excessive love of individual
independence. L.r Sparta, savs a philosopher,
the citizens quicken their step r.vhen thev are
called bv a magistratc; br.rt an Athenian *'ould
be desperate ifhe u.ere thought to be depend
ent on a magistrate.
Hon'ever, as several of the other circum
stances u'hich determined the charactcr of
ancient nations existed in Athens as u'ell; as
there u'as a slar,epopuiation and the territorv
\\'asvery restricted; -,r'efind there too the traces
of the liberty proper to the ancients. The
19
people rlade the larvs, examined the behaviour
of the rnagistrates, called Pericles to account
fbr his conduct, sentenced to death the gen
erals u'ho had commanded the battle of
the Arginusae. Simiiarlv ostracism, that legal
arbitrariness, extolled b), all the legislators
of the age; ostracism, u'hich appears to us, and
rightlv so, a revolting iniquiqr, proves that
the individual u,as much more subservient to
the suprernac_vof thc social body in Athens,
than he is ir-rar-r1,
of tl-re fiee states of Europe
todav.
It follou's fiom rvhat I have just indicated
that u.e can no longer enjoy the liberry of the
ancients, u4rich consisted in an active and constant participation in collective porver. Our
frecdon-r r"nust consist of peaceful enjol.ment
and private independence. The share which in
antiquity e\/ervone held in national sovereignqv rvas by no means an abstract presumption as it is in our o\\rn dar'. The rvili of each
individual had real influence: the exercise of
this u'ill u,as a vivid and repeated pleasure.
Consequentlt'the ancients were ready to make
rlanv a sacrifice to preserve their political
rights and their share in the administration of
the state. Ever.vbodv, f-eelingn'ith pride all drat
his suffrage was \vorth) fbund in this au,areness of his personal importance a great compensatlon.
This compensation no longer exists for us
tocla1,.Lost in the multitude, the individual
can almost never perceive the influence he
exercises. Never does his r.r.iil impress itself
Lrpon the lr.hole; nothing confirms in his eles
his own cooperation.
Thc exercise of political rights, therefore,
oflbrs us but a part of the pieasures that the
ancients fbund in it, u'hile at the samc time the
progress of civilization, the commercial tend c r r c vo i - t h e a g c . [ h e c o m n r r r r r i c a f i o na n l ( ) n g s t
peoples, have infinitely multiplied and varied
t h e m c a n s o f p e r s o r t a lh , r p p i n e s s .
It fbllorvs that u'e must be llr morc attached
than the ancients to our individual independence. For the ancients u'hen they sacrificed
that independence to their political rights, sacrificed lcss to obtain more: while in making the
20
Neqative nnd. Positiye Freed.oru
same sacrifice, we would give more to obtain
less.
the guarantees accorded by institutions
these oleasures.
to
The aim of the ancients was the sharing of
social power among the citizens of the same
fatherland:this is what theycalledliberty.The
T":::::-?;j::j:,ff^lT:Y;::t:T::::::,t:-
aimof themoderns
istheenjoyment
of secu- ';,;i,,:;*;,i:,:,;:Ti#lll?j, 5ilr:d:"lT],:'.1'J
rity in private pleasures; and they call liberty
Press,1988),pp.309-17.