fluence of the Germans—was an important factor. And considering that, of all the philosophers Fichte was the one who appealed most strongly to Carlyle, considering that political speculation bulks far more largely in his work than in that of any contemporary writer, considering finally that he is a shining instance of the change from individualism to the opposite theory which Carlyle himself was busily working out, we can hardly be wrong in inferring that the influence of Fichte was a vital element in the process.
More than an inference this can hardly be. For the collectivism of Carlyle in its earlier form—that which appears in Sartor—has little, or nothing, that is distinctive. And it would be hazardous to see in it any trace of the doctrines which are peculiar to Fichte. When, however, we turn to the more distinctive theory of his later years, the matter is beyond possibility of doubt. The doctrine of Heroes was drawn direct from Fichte. The proof of this will be clear to any one who reads between the lines of Das Wesen des Gelehrten.[1] It is written large in the more systematic exposition of the Staatslehre.
A reference to the argument of the latter, enforced by the quotation of one passage from it, will set this beyond dispute. Having established the principle that the State exists only for the planting and growth of the 'empire of freedom', and having defined freedom as 'obedience to the law of Right' or the 'moral law', understood not as a law given from without but as a vital principle gradually unfolding itself from within, Fichte is led to ask: By what means is the law of Right to be established? is it possible that it should be founded without compulsion? and, if not, how is it to be reconciled with the 'empire of freedom'? Let it be assumed, he urges, that compulsion is indispensable to the establishment of the law of Right. Such compulsion may be, and is, contrary to the instinctive will, the 'natural
- ↑ See Lecture viii: Vom Regenten.
