earth; and that it is an idea more worthy of the power and wisdom of the Creator, to assume that he gave to each zone and each climate its proper inhabitants, to whom that zone and climate would be the most suitable, than to assume that the human species has degenerated in such innumerable instances."
He also argued that great national races never sprang from the growth of a single family into a nation, but always from the association of several families of human beings, raised above their fellow-animals by the nature of their wants, and the gradual invention of a language; each of which families, probably, had originally formed a language peculiar to itself:
Here (he adds) is one of the most important elements of history, still remaining to be examined,—that which is, in truth, the very basis upon which all history must be reared, and the first principle from which it must proceed. This of all subjects should be thoroughly investigated in the first place; and then (to which philosophy is necessary) a universal history ought to be written, which should exhibit all nations from the same point of view. This point of view Reinhold beautifully defines as the relation between reason and sensation. When this universal history is completed, the separate history of each country should follow. This is the way in which I would teach history, if I had Hegewisch's learning and position.
Whatever foundation there might be for history thus taught it is scarcely for us to say. Certain it is, it would have no possible reference to Biblical history. Niebuhr had, at this early period of life, a peculiar inclination to the English, whom he studied both for his literary and historical improvement:
. . . . I spent an evening with Behrens lately, and we laid a wager. He asserts that within a year more than one revolution will break out, and I assert the contrary. On the other hand, I have offered to lay a wager with him, that in four years a monarchical government will be re-established in France. I find myself constantly confirmed in this opinion as I read the English history, which I do a good deal in my leisure moments. If I had time, I should like to get more facts together; and as it is, I have found in the very rare notices which are inserted in the notes to Algernon Sidney's "Discourses," and seem to be quite unknown in Germany, very striking and extraordinary parallels. Unfortunately I have no time for employments of this kind at present! And yet history grows dearer and dearer to me, so much so that my ardour in reading history interferes with my zeal for philosophy, while no philosophy can blunt my inclination to history. . . . . Salchow came in just as I was writing about him. We took up our usual occupation. I am dictating to him a short outline of the history of the French war. I am astonished at my own memory, for I still remember with great distinctness the merest trifles that have occurred from 1792 onwards.
He made quite a hero of the imagination of Algernon Sidney. "This," he said, writing from Kiel, December 6th, 1794, "day is the anniversary of Algernon Sidney's death, one hundred and eleven years ago, and hence it is in my eyes a consecrated day, especially as I have just been studying his noble life again. May God preserve me from a death like his; yet, even with such a death, the virtue and holiness of his life would not be dearly purchased. And now he is forgotten almost throughout the world; and perhaps there are not fifty persons in all Germany who have taken the pains to inform themselves accurately about his life and fortunes. Many may know his name, many know
