That enterprise, be its intermediate processes what they
may, consists in the long run in the organisation of a certain type of common
life. State and plan of existence, programme of human activity or conduct, these
are inseparable terms. The different kinds of State arise from the different
ways in which the promoting group enters into collaboration with the others.
Thus, the ancient State never succeeds in fusing with the others. Rome rules and
educates the Italians and the provincials, but it does not raise them to union
with itself. Even in the city it did not bring about the political fusion of the
citizens. Let it not be forgotten that during the Republic Rome was, strictly
speaking, two Romes: the Senate and the people. State-unification never got
beyond a mere setting up of communication between groups which remained
strangers one to the other. Hence it was that the Empire, when threatened, could
not count on the patriotism of the others, and had to defend itself exclusively
by bureaucratic measures of administration and warfare. This
incapacity of every Greek and Roman group to fuse with other groups arose from
profound causes which this is not the place to examine, but which may definitely
be summed up in one: the man of the ancient world interpreted the collaboration
in which the State inevitably consists, in a simple, elemental, rough fashion,
namely, as a duality of governors and governed.[9]
[9]This is
confirmed by what at first sight seems to contradict it: the granting of
citizenship to all the inhabitants of the Empire. But it turns out that this
concession was made precisely when it was losing the character of political
status and changing into mere burden and service to the State, or into mere
title in civil law. Nothing else could be expected from a State in which
slavery was accepted as a principle. For our "nations," on the
other hand, slavery was merely a residual fact.