the smiles of the great; servility towards those who hold a higher position as bearers of official titles and dignity, a fear of publicity, above all a rather remarkable inclination to a peevish, petty, and sceptical attitude as regards the knowledge and ability of others.  The exaltation of the position of the prince extended to his Court and his officials, as well as to the nobility, which had long since become a Court nobility.”

But absolutism had to go with the changes in human thought under the influence of Rationalism, which brought with it the idea of the State, not the absolute prince, as ruler.  This idea was embodied in the Rechtstaat, or State based on law, which was introduced by Frederick the Great, the “first servant of the State.”  The State, he said, exists for the sake of the citizens.  “One must be insane,” he wrote,

“to imagine that men should have said to one of their equals, ’We will raise you so that we may be your slaves, we will give you the power to guide our thoughts according to yours.’  They rather said:  ’We need you in order to execute our laws, that you show us the way, and defend us.  But we understand that you will respect our liberties.’”

The Rechtstaat exists in Germany to the present day, the Emperor is at the head of it, and the people are content to live within its confines.  It is not, as has been seen, coterminous with the whole liberty of the subject, but is yet a vast bundle of rights and obligations which in public, and much of private, life leaves as little as possible to the unaided or undirected intelligence or goodwill of the citizen.  It is an exaggeration, but still expresses a popular feeling even in Germany itself—­and certainly describes an impression made on the Anglo-Saxon—­to say that outside this bundle of laws and regulations, which, clearly and logically paragraphed, orders to a nicety all the public, and many of the private, relations of the citizens, everything is forbidden or discouraged by authority.  Yet, as has been said, the people are satisfied with it, and it must be admitted that if it confines individual liberty within what to the Anglo-Saxon seem narrow limits, still, by directing the individual to common ends, it works great public advantage.  It is in truth a very intelligent and practical form of Socialism, infinitely less oppressive to the people than would be the socialism of the professed Socialist.

It left, however, the German caste system of Frederick’s day undisturbed; as Professor Richard says: 

“The nobility retained its privileged position.  It was considered a law of nature that the noblemen should assist the monarch in the administration of the State and as leaders of the army; the peasant should cultivate the fields and provide food; the commoner should provide money through industry and commerce.”

To the Anglo-Saxon, of course, brought up with individualistic