Also read Fountains Permanent Effects From this it is abundantly evident, that the theory he wished for, but despaired of ever establishing, was one that would explain such effects; but the object of this Inquiry is totally different. When the Romans were in their vigour, their city was besieged by the Gauls, and saved by an animal of proverbial stupidity; but this could not have happened when Attila was under the walls, and the energy of the citizens was gone. The taking or saving the city, in the first instance, would have been equally accidental, and the consequences of short duration; but, in the latter days, the fall of Rome was owing to PERMANENT causes, and the effect has been without a remedy. It is, then, only concerning the permanent causes, (that is to say, causes that are constantly acting, and produce permanent effects) that we mean to inquire; and, even with regard to those, it is not expected to establish a theory that will be applicable, with certainty, to the preservation of a state, but, merely to establish one, which may serve as a safe guide on a subject, the importance of which is great, beyond calculation. There remains but one other consideration in reply to this, and that is, whether states have, necessarily, by the constitution and nature of things, the same periods of infancy, manhood, and decrepitude, that are found in the individuals that compose them? Mr. Burke thinks they have not; and, indeed, if they had, the following Inquiry would be of no sort of utility. It is of no importance to seek for means of preventing what must of necessity come to pass: but, if the word necessity is changed for tendency or propensity, then it becomes an Inquiry deserving attention, and, as all states have risen, flourished, and fallen, there can be no dispute with the regard to their tendency to do so. However much, at first sight, Mr. Burke's opinion may appear to militate against such an Inquiry, when duly considered, it will be found, not only to approve of the end, but to point out the manner in which the inquiry ought to be conducted; namely, by consulting history. If it is allowed that any practical advantage is to be derived from the history of the past, it can only be, in so far as it is applicable to the present and the future; and, if there is none, it is melancholy to reflect on the volumes that have been written without farther utility than to gratify idle curiosity. Are the true lessons of history, because they are never completely applicable to present affairs, to be ranked with the entertaining, but almost useless, pages of romance? No, certainly. Of the inheritance possessed by the present generation, the history of those that are gone before, is not the least valuable portion. Each reader now makes his application in his own way. It is an irregular application, but not an useless one; and it is, therefore, hoped, that an Inquiry, founded on a regular plan of comparison and analogy, cannot but be of some utility. But why do we treat that as hypothetical, of which there can be no doubt? Wherefore should there be two opinions concerning the utility of an inquiry into those mighty events, that have removed wealth and commerce from the Euphrates and the Nile, to the Thames and the Texel? Does not the sun rise, and do not the seasons return to the plains of Egypt, and the deserts of Syria, the same as they did three thousand years ago? Is not inanimate nature the same now that it was then? Are the principles of vegetation altered? Or have the subordinate animals refused to obey the will of man, to assist him in his labour, or to serve him for his food? No; nature is not less bountiful, and man has more knowledge and more power than at any former period; but it is not the man of Syria, or of Egypt, that has more knowledge, or more power. There he has suffered his race to decay, and, along with himself, his works have degenerated.