I.] TENDENCY IN ENGLISH HISTOW. ' 7 
a member of it, but history is noi/cobcerned with individ 
uals except in their capacity of members of a States That 
a man in England makes a scientific discovery or páints 
a picture, is not in itself an evtznt in the hig^orÿ of 
England. Individuals are important in history^ ití pro 
portion, not to their intrinsic merit, v bjrttc^th^ir'relation 
to the State. Socrates was a much greater man than 
Cleon, but Cleon has a much greater space in Thucydides. 
Newton was a greater man than Harley, yet it is Harley, 
not Newton, who fixes the attention of the historian of 
the reign of Queen Anne. 
After this explanation you will see that the question I 
raised, What is the general drift or goal of English history ? 
is much more definite than it might at first sight appear. 
I am not thinking of any general progress that the human 
race everywhere alike, and therefore also in England, may 
chance to be making, nor even necessarily of any progress 
peculiar to England. By England I mean solely the state 
or political community which has its seat in England. 
Thus strictly limited, the question may seem to you perhaps 
a good deal less interesting; however that may be, it 
certainly becomes much more manageable. 
Ihe English State then, in what direction and towards 
what goal has that been advancing ? The words which 
jump to our lips in answer are Liberty, Democracy! They 
are words which want a great deal of defining. Liberty 
has of course been a leading characteristic of England as 
compared with continental countries, but in the main 
liberty is not so much an end to which we have been 
tending as a possession which we have long enjoyed. The 
struggles of the seventeenth century secured it—even if 
they did not first acquire it—for us. In later times there 
has been a movement towards something which is often