This is Mises Weekends with your host Jeff Deist. Ladies and gentlemen, I am on the road this weekend, so our show consists of an oldie but goodie, a vintage talk by none other than Dr. Hans Hermann Hoppe, delivered in 1988 at a Mises Institute conference in New York City, and it is titled Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis. And it might surprise you to understand that there are actually some intellectual affinities, as Hoppe puts it, between Austrianism and Marxism stemming from their common conviction that there does indeed exist something like exploitation and a ruling class. So if you like Hoppe and you're interested in Marx, stay tuned for a great speech. My topic is Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis. I want to do the following. First, I will present a series of theses that constitute the hardcore of the Marxist theory of history. I claim that all of them are essentially correct. And then I will show how these true theses are derived in Marxism from a false starting point. And finally, I want to demonstrate how Austrianism in the Mises-Wolzbach tradition can give a correct but categorically different explanation of their validity. Let me begin with the hardcore of the Marxist belief system. The history of mankind is the history of class struggles. It is the history of struggles between a relatively small ruling class and a larger class of the exploited. The primary form of exploitation is economic. The ruling class expropriates parts of the productive output of the exploited or, as Marxists say, it appropriates a social surplus product and uses it for its own consumptive purposes. Second, the ruling class is unified by its common interest in upholding its exploitative position and maximizing its exploitatively appropriated surplus product. It never deliberately gives up power or exploitation income. Instead, any loss in power or income must be wrestled away from it through struggles, whose outcome ultimately depends on the class consciousness of the exploited. That is, on whether or not and to what extent the exploited are aware of their own status and are consciously united with other class members in common opposition to exploitation. Third, class rule manifests itself primarily in specific arrangements regarding the assignment of property rights or in Marxist terminology in specific relations of production. In order to protect these arrangements or production relations, the ruling class forms and is in command of the state as apparatus of compulsion and coercion. The state enforces and helps reproduce a given class structure through the administration of the system of class justice. And it assists in the creation and the support of an ideological superstructure designed to lend legitimacy to the existence of class rule. Fourth, internally, the process of competition within the ruling class generates a tendency toward increasing concentration and centralization. A multipolar system of exploitation is gradually supplanted by an oligarchic or monopolistic one. Fewer and fewer exploitation centers remain in operation and those that do are increasingly integrated into a hierarchical order. And externally, that is, as regards the international system, this internal centralization process will lead to imperialist interstate wars and the territorial expansion of exploitative rule. Fifth, with the centralization and expansion of exploitative rule gradually approaching its ultimate limit of world domination, class rule will increasingly become incompatible with the further development and improvement of productive forces. Economic stagnation and crises become more and more characteristic and create the so-called objective conditions for the emergence of a revolutionary class consciousness of the exploited. The situation becomes ripe for the establishment of a classless society, the withering away of the state or the replacement of government of men over men by the administration of things. And as a result, unheard of economic prosperity. All of these ceases can be given a perfectly good justification, as I will show. Unfortunately, however, it is Marxism which subscribes to all of them that has done more than any other ideological system to discredit their validity in deriving them from a patently absurd exploitation theory. Now, what is this Marxist theory of exploitation? According to Marx, such pre-capitalist social systems as slavery and feudalism are characterized by exploitation. There is no quarrel with this. For after all, the slave is not a free laborer and he cannot be said to gain from his being enslaved. Rather, in being enslaved, his utility is reduced at the expense of an increase in wealth appropriated by the slave master. The interests of the slave and that of the slave owner are indeed antagonistic. The same is true as regards the interest of the feudal lord who extracts a land rent from a peasant who works on land homesteaded by himself, that is, by the peasant. The lord's gains are the peasant's losses. And it is also undisputed that slavery as well as feudalism indeed hampers the development of productive forces. Neither slave nor serve will be as productive as they would be without slavery or serve them. But the genuinely new Marxist idea is that essentially nothing is changed as regards exploitation under capitalism. That is, if the slave becomes a free laborer or if the peasant decides to farm land homesteaded by someone else and pays rent in exchange for doing so. To be sure, Marx in the famous chapter 24 of the first volume of his capital, titled The So-called Original Accumulation, gives a historical account of the emergence of capitalism, which makes the point that much or even most of the initial capitalist property is the result of plunder, enclosure and conquest. And similarly, in chapter 25 on the modern theory of colonialism, the role of force and violence in exporting capitalism to the, as we would now say, third world is heavily emphasized. Admittedly, all this is generally correct, and insofar as it is, there can be no quarrel with labeling such capitalism exploitative. Yet one should be aware of the fact that Marx here is engaged in a trick. In engaging in historical investigations and arousing the reader's indignation regarding the brutalities underlying the formation of many capitalist fortunes, he actually sidesteps the issue at hand. He distracts from the fact that his thesis is really an entirely different one. Namely, that even if one were to have a clean capitalism, so to speak, that is one in which the original appropriation of capital was the result of nothing else but homesteading work and savings, the capitalist who hired labor to be employed with this capital would nonetheless be engaged in exploitation. Indeed, Marx considered the proof of this thesis his most important contribution to economic analysis. What then is his proof of the exploitative character of a clean capitalism? It consists in the observation that the factor prices, in particular the wages paid to laborers by the capitalist, are lower than the output prices. The laborer, for instance, is paid a wage that represents consumption goods, which can be produced in three days, but he actually works five days for his wage and produces an output of consumption goods that exceeds what he receives as remuneration. The output of the two extra days, the surplus value in Marx's terminology, is appropriated by the capitalist. Hence, according to Marx, there is exploitation. Now what is wrong with this analysis? The answer becomes obvious once it is asked why the laborer would possibly agree to such a deal. He agrees because his wage payment represents present goods, while his own labor services represent only future goods, and he values present goods more highly. After all, he could also decide not to sell his labor services to the capitalist and then reap the full value of his output himself. But this would of course imply that he would have to wait longer for any consumption goods to become available to him. In selling his labor services, he demonstrates that he prefers a smaller amount of consumption goods now over a possibly larger one at some future date. On the other hand, why would the capitalist want to strike a deal with the laborer? Why would he want to advance present goods, that is, present money, to the laborer in exchange for services that bear fruit only later? Obviously, he would not want to pay out, for instance, $100 now if he were to receive the same amount in one year's time. In that case, why not simply hold on to it for one year and receive the extra benefit of having actual command over it during the entire time? Instead, he must expect to receive a larger sum than $100 in the future in order to give up $100 now in the form of wages paid to the laborer. He must expect to be able to earn a profit or, more correctly, an interest return. And he is constrained by time preference that is the fact that an actor invariably prefers earlier over later goods in yet another way. For if one can obtain a larger sum in the future by sacrificing a smaller one in the present, why then is the capitalist not engaged in more saving than he actually is? Why does he not hire more laborers than he does if each one of them promises an additional interest return? The answer again should be obvious, because the capitalist is a consumer too and cannot help being one. The amount of his savings and investing is restricted necessarily that he too, like the laborer, requires a supply of present goods large enough to secure the satisfaction of all those wants, the satisfaction of which during the waiting time is considered more urgent than the advantages which a still greater lengthening of the period of production would provide. Now what is wrong with Mark's theory of exploitation then is that he does not understand the phenomenon of time preference as a universal category of human action. That the laborer does not receive his full worth, so to speak, has nothing to do with exploitation but merely reflects the fact that it is impossible for men to exchange future goods against present ones except at a discount. Contrary to the case of slave and slave master, where the latter benefits at the expense of the former, the relationship between the free laborer and the capitalist is a mutually beneficial one. The laborer enters the agreement because, given his time preference, he prefers a smaller amount of present goods over a larger future one. And the capitalist enters this because, given his time preference, he has a reverse preference order and ranks a larger future amount of goods more highly than a smaller present one. Their interests are not antagonistic but harmonious. Without the capitalist's expectation of an interest return, the laborer would be worse off having to wait longer than he wishes to wait. And without the laborer's preference for present goods, the capitalist would be worse off having to resort to less roundabout and less efficient production methods than those which he desires to adopt. Nor can the capitalist wage system be regarded as an impediment to the further development of the forces of production, as Marx claims. If the laborer were not permitted to sell his labor services and the capitalist to buy them, output would lower because production would have to take place with relatively reduced levels of capital accumulation, under its through hostetting, producing and or savings. In each case, it is brought about with the expectation that it will lead to an increase in the output of future goods. The value an actor attaches to his capital reflects the value he attaches to all expected future incomes attributable to its cooperation and discounted by his rate of time preference. If, as in the case of collectively owned factors of production, an actor is no longer granted exclusive control over his accumulated capital hence over the future income to be derived from its employment, but partial control instead is assigned to non-homesteaders, non-producers and non-savers, the value for him of the expected income and hence that of the capital goods is reduced. His effective rate of time preference will rise. There will be less homesteading of resources whose scarcity is recognized and less saving for the maintenance of existing and the production of new capital goods. The period of production, the roundaboutness of the production structure will be shortened and relative impoverishment will result. If Mark's theory of capitalist exploitation and his ideas on how to end exploitation and establish universal prosperity are false to the point of being ridiculous, it is clear that any theory of history which can be derived from it must be false too. Or if it should be correct, it must have been derived incorrectly. Instead of going through the lengthier task of explaining all of the flaws in the Marx's argument as it sets out from its theory of capitalist exploitation and ends with a theory of history which I presented earlier, I will take a shortcut here. I will now outline in the briefest possible way the correct Austrian-Misesien-Rothbardian theory of exploitation. I will then give an explanatory sketch of how this theory makes sense out of the class theory of history and highlight along the way some key differences between this class theory and the Marxist one and also point out some intellectual affinities between Austrianism and Marxism stemming from their common conviction that there does indeed exist something like exploitation and the ruling class. The starting point for the Austrian exploitation theory is plain and simple as it should be. Actually, it has already been established through the analysis of the Marxist theory. Exploitation characterized the relationship between slave and slave master and between serve and feudal lord, but no exploitation was found possible under a clean capitalism. Now what is the principal difference between these two cases? The answer is this, the recognition or non-recognition of the homesteading principle. The peasant under feudalism is exploited because he does not have exclusive control over land that he homesteaded and the slave because he has no exclusive control over his own homesteaded body. If contrary to this, everyone has exclusive control over his own body, that is, everyone is a free laborer and acts in accordance with the homesteading principle, there can be no exploitation. It is logically absurd to claim that a person who homesteads goods not previously homesteaded by anybody else or who employs such goods in the production of future goods or who saves presently homesteaded or produced goods in order to increase the future supply of goods could thereby exploit anybody. Nothing has been taken away from anybody in this process and additional goods have actually been created and it would be equally absurd to claim that an agreement between different homesteaders, savers and producers regarding their nonexploitatively appropriated goods or services could possibly contain any foul plays in. Instead, exploitation takes place whenever any deviation from the homesteading principle occurs. It is exploitation whenever a person successfully claims partial or full control over resources which he has not homesteaded, saved or produced and which he has not acquired contractually from a previous producer owner. Exploitation is the expropriation of homesteaders, producers and savers by late-coming non-homesteaders, non-producers, non-savers and non-contractors. It is the expropriation of people whose property claims are grounded in work and contract by people whose claims are derived from thin air and who disregard other's works and contracts. Needless to say, exploitation defined in this way is in fact an integral part of human history. One can acquire and increase wealth either through homesteading, producing, saving or contracting or by expropriating homesteaders, producers, savers or contractors. There are no other ways. Both methods are natural to mankind. Alongside homesteading, producing and contracting, there have always been non-productive and non-contractual property acquisitions. And in the course of economic development, just as the producers and contractors can form firms, enterprises and corporations, so can exploiters combine to large-scale exploitation enterprises to governments and states. The ruling class is initially composed of the members of such an exploitation firm. And with a ruling class established over a given territory and engaged in the expropriation of economic resources from a class of exploited producers, the center of all history indeed becomes the struggle between exploiters and the exploited. History, then, correctly told, is essentially the history of the victories and defeats of the rulers in their attempt to maximize exploitatively appropriated income and of the ruled in their attempts to resist and reverse this tendency. It is in this assessment of history that Austrians and Marxists agree and by a notable intellectual affinity between Austrians and Marxist historical investigations exists. Both oppose a historiography which recognizes only action or interaction economically and morally all on a par. And both oppose a historiography that instead of adopting such a value neutral stand thinks that one's own arbitrarily introduced subjective value judgments have to provide the foil for one's historical narratives. Rather, history must be told in terms of freedom and exploitation, parasitism and economic impoverishment, private property and its destruction. Otherwise, it is told false. While productive enterprises come into or go out of existence because of voluntary support or its absence, a ruling class never comes to power because there is a demand for it, nor does it abdicate when abdication is demonstrably demanded. One cannot say by any stretch of the imagination that homesteaders, producers, savers and contractors have demanded their expropriation. They must be coerced into accepting it and this proves conclusively that the exploitation firm is not in demand at all. Nor can one say that a ruling class can be brought down by abstaining from transactions with it in the same way as one can bring down a productive enterprise. For the ruling class acquires its income through non-productive and non-contractual transactions and thus is unaffected by boycotts. Rather, what makes the rise of an exploitation firm possible and what alone can in turn bring it down is a specific state of public opinion or, in Marx's terminology, a specific state of class consciousness. An exploiter creates victims and victims are potential enemies. It is possible that this resistance can be lastingly broken down by force in the case of a group of men exploiting another group of roughly the same size. However, more than force is needed to expand exploitation over a population many times its own size. For this to happen, a firm must also have public support. A majority of the population must accept the exploitative actions as legitimate. This acceptance can range from active enthusiasm to passive resignation. But it must be acceptance in the sense that a majority must have given up the idea of actively or passively resisting any attempt to enforce non-productive and non-contractual property acquisitions. The class consciousness must be low, undeveloped and fuzzy. Only as long as this state of affairs lasts is there still room for an exploitative firm to prosper even if no actual demand for it exists. Only if and insofar as the exploited and expropriated develop a clear idea of their own situation and are united with other members of their class through an ideological movement which gives expression to the idea of a classless society where all exploitation is abolished can the power of the ruling class be broken. Only if and insofar as the majority of the exploited public becomes consciously integrated into such a movement and accordingly displays a common outrage over all non-productive or non-contractual property acquisitions shows a common contempt for everyone who engages in such acts and deliberately contributes nothing to help them make successful not to mention actively trying to obstruct them can its power be brought down to crumble. The gradual abolishment of feudal and absolutist rule and the rise of increasingly capitalist societies in Western Europe and the United States and along with this unheard of economic growth and rising population numbers was the result of an increasing class consciousness among the exploited who were ideologically molded together through the doctrines of natural rights and liberalism. In this, Austrians and Marxists agree. They disagree, however, on the next assessment. The reversal of this liberalization process and steadily increased levels of exploitation in these societies since the last third of the 19th century and particularly pronounced since World War I are the result of a loss in class consciousness. In fact, in the Austrian view, Marxism must accept much of the blame for this development by misdirecting attention from the correct exploitation model of the homesteader-producer-saver contractor versus the non-homesteader-producer-saver contractor to the fallacious model of the wage earner versus the capitalist. Thereby, muddling things up. The establishment of a ruling class over an exploited one many times its own size by coercion and the manipulation of public opinion that is a low degree of class consciousness among the exploited finds its most basic institutional expression in the creation of a system of public law superimposed on private law. The ruling class sets itself apart and protects its position as a ruling class by adopting a constitution for their firm's operation. On the one hand, by formalizing the internal operations within the state apparatus as well as its relations vis-à-vis the exploited population, a constitution creates some degree of legal stability. The more familiar and popular private law notions are incorporated into constitutional and public law, the more conducive this will be to the creation of favorable public opinion. On the other hand, any constitution and public law also formalizes the exemptory status of the ruling class as regards the homesteading principle. It formalizes the right of the state's representatives to engage in non-productive and non-contractual property acquisitions and the ultimate subordination of private to public law. Class justice, that is a dualism of one set of laws for the rulers and another for the ruled, comes to bear in this dualism of public and private law and in the domination and infiltration of public law over and into private law. It is not because private property rights are recognized by law as Marxists think that class justice is established, rather class justice comes into being precisely whenever a legal distinction exists between a class of persons acting under and being protected by public law and another class acting under and being protected instead by some subordinate private law. More specifically then, the basic proposition of the Marxist theory of the secularist laws, the state is not exploitative because it protects the capitalist's property rights, but because it itself is exempt from the restriction of having to acquire property productively and contractually. In spite of this fundamental misconception, however, Marxism, because it correctly interprets the state as exploitative. Contrary, for instance, to the public choice school which sees it as a normal firm, among others, is onto some important insights regarding the logic of state operations. For one thing, Marxism recognizes the strategic function of redistributive state policies. As an exploitative firm, the state must at all times be interested in a low degree of class consciousness among the ruled. The redistribution of property and income, a policy of DVD at Emperor, is the state's means with which it can create divisiveness among the public and destroy the formation of a unifying class consciousness of the exploited. Furthermore, the redistribution of state power itself through democratizing the state constitution and opening up every ruling position to everyone and granting everyone the right to participate in the determination of state personnel and policy is a means for reducing the resistance against exploitation as such. Secondly, the state is indeed, as Marxists see it, the great center of ideological propaganda and mystification. Exploitation is really freedom. Taxes are really voluntary contributions. Non-contractual relations are really conceptually contractual ones. No one is ruled by anyone, but we all rule ourselves. Without the state needs a law nor security would exist and the poor would perish. All of this is part of the ideological superstructure designed to legitimize an underlying basis of economic exploitation. And finally, Marxists are also correct in noticing the close association between the state and business, especially the banking elite, even though the explanation for it is faulty. The reason is not that the bourgeois establishment sees and supports the state as a guarantor of private property rights and contractualism. On the contrary, the establishment correctly perceives the state as a very anti-thesis to private property that it is and takes a close interest in it for this reason. The more successful a business, the lentile exception. But the larger also the potential gains that can be achieved if it can come under government special protection and is exempt from the full weight of capitalist competition. This is why the business establishment is interested in the state and its infiltration. The ruling elite in turn is interested in close cooperation with the business establishment because of its financial powers. In particular, the banking elite is of interest because as an exploitative firm, the state naturally wishes to possess complete autonomy for counterfeiting. By offering to cut the banking elite in on its own counterfeiting machinations and allowing them to counterfeit on top of its own counterfeited notes under a system of fractional reserve banking, the state can easily reach this goal and establish a system of state monopolized money and cartilized banking controlled by its central bank. And through this direct counterfeiting connection with the banking system and by extension the bank's major clients, the ruling class in fact extends far beyond the state apparatus to the very nervous centers of civil society. Not that much different, at least in appearance from the picture that Marxists like to paint of the cooperation between banking, business elites and the state. Competition within the ruling class and among different ruling classes brings about a tendency toward increasing concentration. Marxism is right in this. However, its faulty theory of exploitation again leads it to locate the cause for this tendency in the wrong place. Marxism sees such a tendency as inherent in capitalist competition. Yet it is precisely so long as people are engaged in a clean capitalism that competition is not a form of zero-sum interaction. The hopes that are the producer, saver and contractor do not gain at another's expense. Their gains either leave another's physical possessions completely unaffected or they actually imply neutral gains as in the case of all contractual exchanges. Capitalism thus can account for increases in absolute wealths. But under its regime no systematic tendency toward relative concentration can be said to exist. Instead, zero-sum interactions characterize not only the relationship between the ruler and the ruled, but also between competing rulers. Exploitation defined as non-productive and non-contractual property acquisitions is only possible as long as there is anything that can be appropriated. Yet if there were free competition in the business of exploitation there would obviously be nothing left to expropriate. Thus exploitation requires monopoly over some given territory and population. And the competition between exploiters is by its very nature eliminative and must bring about a tendency toward relative concentration of exploitation firms as well as a tendency towards centralization within each exploitative firm. The development of states rather than capitalist firms provides the foremost illustration of this tendency. There are now a significantly smaller number of states with exploitative control over much larger territories than in previous centuries. And within each state apparatus there has in fact been a constant tendency toward increasing the powers of the central government at the expense of its regional and local subdivisions. Yet outside the state apparatus a tendency toward relative concentration has also become apparent when for the same reason. Not as should be clear by now because of any trade inherent in capitalism but because the ruling class has expanded its rule into the midst of civil society through the creation of a state banking business alliance and in particular the establishment of a system of central banking. If a concentration and centralization of state power then takes place it is only natural that this be accompanied by a parallel process of relative concentration and cartelization of banking and industry. Along with increased state powers the associated banking and business establishments powers of eliminating or putting economic competitors at disadvantage by means of non-productive or non-contractual expropriation increases. Business concentration is a reflection of the stateization of economic life. The primary means for the expansion of state power and the elimination of rival exploitation centers is war and military domination. Interstate competition implies a tendency toward war and imperialism. As centers of exploitation their interests are by nature antagonistic. Moreover, with each of them internally in command of the instrument of taxation and absolute counterfeiting powers it is possible for the ruling classes to let others pay for their wars. Naturally, if one does not have to pay for one's own risky ventures but can force others to do so one tends to be a greater risk taker and more trigger happy otherwise would be. Marxism, contrary to much of the so-called bourgeois social sciences gets the facts right. There is indeed a tendency toward imperialism operative in history and the foremost imperialist powers are indeed the most advanced capitalist nations. Yet the explanation is once again faulty. It is a state as an institution exempt from the capitalist rules of property acquisitions that is by nature aggressive. And the historical evidence of a close correlation between capitalism and imperialism only seemingly contradicts this. It finds its explanation easily enough in the fact that in order to come out successfully from interstate wars a state must be in command of sufficient in relative terms of sufficient economic resources. Other things being equal the state with more ample resources will win. As an exploitative firm a state is by nature destructive of wealth and capital accumulation. Wealth is produced exclusively by civil society and the weaker the state's exploitative powers the more wealth and capital society accumulates. Thus paradoxical as it may sound at first the weaker or the more liberal state is internally the further developed capitalism is. A developed capitalist economy to extract from makes a state richer and a richer state then makes for more and more successful expansionist wars. It is this relationship that explains why initially the states of western Europe and in particular Great Britain were the leading imperialist powers and why in the 20th century this role has been assumed by the United States. And similarly straightforward yet once again entirely non-Marxist explanation exists for the observation always pointed out by Marxist that the banking and business establishment is usually among the most ardent supporters of military strength and imperial expansion. It is not because the expansion of capitalist markets requires exploitation but because the expansion of state protected and privileged businesses requires that such protection be extended also to foreign countries and that foreign competitors be hampered through non-contractual and non-productive property acquisitions in the same way or even more so than internal competition. Specifically the business elite supports imperialism if this imperialism promises to lead to a position of military domination of one's own allied state over another state for then from a position of military strength it becomes possible to establish a system of as one might call it monetary imperialism. The dominating state will use its superior power to enforce a policy of internationally coordinated inflation. Its own central bank sets a pace in the process of counterfeiting and the central banks of the dominated states are ordered to use its currency, the currency of the dominating state as their own reserve currency and inflate on top of it. This way along with the dominating state its associated banking and business establishment as the earliest receivers of the counterfeit reserve currency can engage in an almost costless expropriation also of foreign property owners and income producers. A double layer of exploitation of a foreign state and a foreign elite on top of a national state and a national elite is imposed on the exploited class in the dominated territories causing prolonged economic dependency and relative economic stagnation vis-à-vis a dominant nation. It is this very uncapitalist situation that characterizes the status of the United States and the US dollar and that gives rise to the quite correct charge of US economic exploitation and dollar imperialism. Now I come to the last thesis. The increasing concentration and centralization of exploitative powers leads to economic stagnation impedes the development of productive forces and thereby creates the objective conditions for its ultimate demise and the establishment of a classless society capable of producing unheard of economic prosperity. Contrary to Marxist claims this is not of course the result of any historical laws. In fact there exists no such thing as historical laws as Marxists conceive of them. Nor is it the result of a tendency for the profit rate to fall with an increased organic composition of capital as Marxist phrased that is an increase in the proportion of constant capital as compared with variable capital. Instead the likelihood of crises that promote the development of a higher degree of brief commented exploitation is destructive of wealth formation yet in the competition of exploitative firms that is of states less exploitative ones because they are in command of more ample resources will win out over more exploitative ones. Hence the process of economic imperialism specifically of US imperialism initially has a relatively state rule becomes increasingly recognized as incompatible with the further development of productive forces and economic growth. Anti-status social pressures mount and bring about a process of withering away the state. Contrary to the Marxist model however if and in so far as this occurs it will not mean social ownership of means of production. In fact not only is social ownership economically inefficient as I've already explained earlier. Moreover it is in fact incompatible with the idea that the state is withering away because if means of production are owned collectively and if it is realistically assumed that not everybody's idea as to what to do with these means happens to coincide as if by a miracle then it is precisely socially owned factors of production which require state action. That is they require state action in order to impose one person's will on another disagreeing person's will. Instead the withering away of the state then and this is the end of exploitation means the establishment of a pure private property society ordered by nothing but private law. Thank you.


This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. The complete works of Tacitus, to which are prefixed political discourses upon that author, edited and translated by Thomas Gordon, with introductory essays by Thomas Gordon. Volume 1 Introduction and Dedication To the Right Honourable Sir Robert Walpole First Commissioner of the Treasury, Chancellor and Under-treasurer of the Exchequer, one of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, a Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter. Sir, as you were the first who promoted the following work in a public manner, I take liberty to present it to the public under your name, and to do an act of acknowledgement for one of generosity. Be pleased to be the patron of a book which under your patronage was composed. It is natural and common for men, who profess letters, to seek the countenance and protection of men of power, and from such of them as to greatness of fortune were happy enough to join greatness of mind. They have not sought in vain. Power without politeness and complacency is at best distasteful, often hated, amiable when it knows how to condescend. It is thus that men in high stations avoid envy from such a stand below them. He who cannot rise to their height finds a sort of retaliation and amends in their coming down to him. No man is pleased with the behaviour which represents him as contemptible. To make us think well of ourselves by another showing us that we are well thought of by him is a generous and artful civility, a lesson which stately and rebuking men want to learn, a mean man of great quality and figure for such incongruities we often meet. Teachers others to scorn him by his showing that he scorns them. Affability therefore accompanied with good sense which will always guard it from exceeding is the art of keeping great splendour from growing offensive to the rest of the world. It must be owned that no affability, even the most flowing, no genius, even the most elevated can escape particular distaste. And from the dislike of persons to that of actions the transition is easy and too common. Men do not easily discern good qualities and intentions in one to whom they do not wish well. All men, even those of the most unexceptionable characters, are apt to form their judgement over hastily when their passions are warmed. And from this cause it has often proceeded that the inevitable misfortunes of times and accidents have been charged upon such whose interest and study it was to prevent them. This is one of the evils and uneasinesses in separately attending every administration. When the state is under heavy burdens and difficulties, the means to relieve and support it will be almost always proportionably heavy, and as whatever proves heavy, however necessary, is easily called oppression, so the hand which administers the remedy may merely, because it is felt, be easily styled oppressive. Besides the reason which I have already given for this address, I have another one taken from the character of my author, as he was a man of affairs, a great minister. I chose to represent him to another, to one who, having been long engaged in public life, having had long experience of men, soon far into their benton foibles, and being conversant with the mysteries and primary operations of government, can thus readily judge whether Tacitus has refined too much in his politics, or been over-severe in his senses upon mankind, or whether this charge has not been chiefly raised by men of speculation, who, however, furnished with learning, were yet unacquainted with the transactions of states and ignorance of human nature, or perhaps willing to do honour to it, or to themselves at the expense of truth. Men are to be known not by theories, taken up in closets, but by commerce with men, and best of all in those great scenes of public life where you, sir, have sustained for so many years a high and important part, and gained eminent experience as well as the just opinion of great sufficiency. I could here agreeably to the usual style and purpose of dedication say a great many advantageous things, without risking the usual censure incurred by dedicators, but such things I would much rather say of you than to you. In this place I shall only profess to be what I entirely am with perfect truth and high regard. Sir, your most obliged and most obedient humble servant, T. Gordon. End of the introduction. The complete works of Tacitus, to which are prefixed political discourses upon that author, edited and translated by Thomas Gordon, with introductory essays by Thomas Gordon. Volume 1. Discourse 1. Upon the former English translations of Tacitus. Section 1. Of the translation by Greenway and Sir H. Seville. I am going to offer to the public the translation of a work which, for wisdom and force, is in higher fame and consideration than almost any other that has yet appeared amongst men. A work often translated into many languages, seldom well into any, into ours, worst of all. The first was done in Queen Elizabeth's reign. The annals by one Greenway and four books of the history by Sir Henry Seville. A man exceeding learned and esteemed for his critical notes upon Tacitus, as well as for those upon St. Chrysostom, of whose works he has published an elaborate edition. But though he was an able grammarian and understood the antiquities in Tacitus and his words, his translation is a mean performance. His style is stiff, spiritless and obscure. He drops many of his author's ideas, preserves none of his turns, and starves his meaning even where he best conveys it. It is a mere translation that rather of one word into another than that of a dead tongue into a living, or of sense into sense. The Roman idiom is forced and wire-drawn into the English, a task altogether impossible, and not adopted and naturalized, a thing possible enough. And out of a book profuse and eloquence, fine spirit and images, he has drawn a work harsh, halting and barren. Ogleby is not more unlike Virgil. Greenway is still worse than Seville. He had none of his learning, he had all his faults and more. The former has at least performed like a schoolmaster, the latter like a schoolboy. Section 2 of the English translation by several hands About a hundred years after them, another English translation was undertaken by several hands, Mr. Dryden and others. Dryden has translated the first book, but done it almost literally from Mr. Amalot de la Hussue, with so much haste and little exactness, that besides his many mistakes he has introduced several Galicisms. He follows the French author, Seville, and writes French English rather than trust him out of his eye. It is true, La Hussue is an honest translator and one of the foremost. He has gone as far as the thirteenth anal-inclusive, but his phrases are often weak and trifling, and he is subject to all that faintness and circumlocution for which the French tongue is noted. Dryden copies his manner as well as his meaning. It was pure hurry and want of application, for he was a fine writer, had a copious imagination, a good ear, and a flowing style. Strike away all that is bad in his works, enough will remain to show him a great poet, a man of parts, and a master of language. Even his many enemies and opposers show the considerableness of the man, but his excellencies in many things excuse not his faults in others. His translation of Tacitus is poor and languid, nowhere derived from the original, generally full of mistakes. At best it is only the French translator ill-translated or ill-imitated. OF THE LAST TRANSLATION OF THE FIRST ANAL Tacitus, talking of the latter end of Augustus, his reign, says, DOMIRES TRANQUILAE, EADEM MAGESTRATUM VACABULA. These are two sentences independent of each other, yet Mr. Dryden translates, all things at Rome being in a settled peace, the magistrates still retain their former names. As if the one was all the cause of the other. This blunder is owing to Lausueil understood. Tout est toi tranquillé à la Rome, les magistrates avoient les mêmes noms. If instead of avoient he had said ayaan, the translation would have come pretty near the French, but the English translator does not seem to understand French, though he has no other guide, else how could he so miserably mistake Parse Multomaxima iminentes dominos variis rumorebos de Cerebant as to render it, quotes open, the greater part employed their time in various discourses of future matters. Quotes closed. From this it is plain he never looked into the original, or understood it not. He was misled by the French, which he appears here to have as little understood. La plus par les païssoins affaires divers use gemens des cruis alloins devenus les matres. But more wretched still is what follows. Tacitus represents the Romans discursing during the decline of Augustus concerning the next successors in view, Agrippa, Paslimus and Tiberius, and makes them say of Livia the Empress, Achedera Matrem, Muliebri, Impotentia, Servendum, Feminae, etc. Quotes open, his mother of a violent and imperious nature, according to the sex themselves, subjected to the slavery of a woman. Quotes closed. This is jargon and nonsense, though the author seems to have followed the French, qui Tiberius a un mer imperius in violen, Selon la coutume du sexe, à la quelle il foudra obé en esclaves. Well may he be said to follow the French translator blindly, and lest is the wonder that he adopts his galasisms where he happens to understand them. When Drusus, the son of Tiberius, enter the camp of the seditious legions in Pannonia and the mutinous soldiery were gathered round him, Tacitus makes a charming and strong description of their behavior, with the several vicissitudes of their passions, which shifted strangely according as they dreaded his person and authority, or recalled their grievances, and surveyed their own numbers and strength, and he concludes the whole according to his custom with a fine reflection. This is all pretty well translated by La Hussue. I shall only quote the last clause or reflection. And this I quote only to show how impotently the English translator hangs by the French phrase and takes it literally, quotes open, by their different motions, says he, they gave and took terror in their turns, quotes closed. Is not this pithy and sounding? There are numbers of such instances both as to language and strength, in so much that I have been sometimes tempted to think it not to be Dryden's, but I have many assurances of it being his. I take it for granted it was a job for the booksellers, carelessly performed by one who wanted no capacity, but only pains or encouragement to have done it much better, perhaps very well. The next anal is translated by another hand, less negligently, but with small taste and vigor, no resemblance of the original, where in every sentence almost there occur surprising images and turns, which nowhere appear in the translation, quotes open, tis not the fire of Tacitus, but his embers quenched with English words, cold and gothic. Let anyone read particularly the two speeches of Arminius and Maro Baudouis to their different armies just before they engaged, Chapter 45 and 46, and he will find that between Tacitus and his translator there is just as much difference as between a living soul and a cold carcass. Yet the lifeless translation of this anal, compared with that of the third by a different hand, is an able performance. Section 5 of the last translation of the third anal. This translation is in truth wretched beyond belief, tis below drollery and a sort of middle between bad sense and good nonsense. Tacitus says of the arrival of the fleet, which brought Agrippina from Asia with her husband's funeral earn and her children now fatherless, classus pallatim succesit non alacri ut azzolet, remigio sed cumptis ad tristiam composistis, annals, Book 3, Chapter 1, quotes open, the fleet, says the translator, came in, not rowing briskly as they used to do, but slowly and with sorrow in their countenances, quotes closed. A translation worthy of one who could make Tacitus say elsewhere, quotes open, drusis left the city to inquire his fortune, quotes closed. Would not one think that he went to some remote country to consult a cunning man, or meant the translator to joke upon the religion and solemnities of the Romans? The words of Tacitus, which he thus perverts or rather quite drops are, drusis urbe egressus repetendis auspiciis, quotes open, drusis went without the gates to repeat the formality of the auspices, quotes closed. Tacitus, at the end of his discourse upon laws, says quesar augustus poten liae securus, quae trium veratu userat, abolevit dedique jura ques pace et principae ulereimur, bracket editor acriera, bracket closed, ex eio vincla inditi custodes et lege papia popeia premis inducti utsi et cetera, sed altius penetrabant custodes skill, ubemque et italiam et cod usquam, civium corepuraant multorumque excisi status et terror omnibus intentabatur, nisi tiberius statuendo remedio et cetera. Now observe the source and elegance, and truth with which this is rendered by the translator, quotes open, Augustus Caesar, being settled in his authority, he abolished those things he commanded in the triumvirate, and gave new laws to be observed in time of peace and under a monarch, and that they might be the better kept, he appointed some to look after them, quotes closed, as if laws had been a flock of sheep, quotes open, the law papia popeia provided et cetera, but the informers went farther, not only in the city, but through all Italy, where any citizens were, ruined many families, and frightened them all, to remedy which tiberius, quotes closed, et cetera. A little father tacitus says, Edversus animis acciactum cod filio claudii socher seianus destenaretur, poluise nobilitatem familiae vedevantur, suspectum queiam nimiae spei seianum ultra extulise. Quotes open, there were, says the translator, great discontents upon Claudius' son being to marry Sejanus' daughter as a disparagement to him, bracket open, to what him? Sejanus was the last named, bracket closed, quotes open, but Sejanus, whose ambition was suspected, was much exalted upon it, quotes closed. Tacitus' discoursing of the revolt of Flores and Sacrovir, and representing the sentiments of the people, upon that, and other alarms, says, in crepabant tiberium, quote, intanto rerum moto libellis accusatorum insumerit operam, an iulium sacrovirum maya statis crimine reum insenatu forae, extittise tandem virus qui cruentas epistulas armis cohiberent, miseram pachem velbelo bene multari, tanto impensius in securetatem camposistus neque loco neque voltu mutato sed ut solitum per ilus dies egit, altitudine animi ancamparerat modica esse et vulgatis leviora. Here how this is translated, blaming, quotes open, Tiberius for employing himself in reading in former's accusations where there was so great commotions. What said they have the senate found Julius Sacrovir guilty of treason? Some have had the courage to suppress by arms the bloody libels of a tyrant, war is a good change for a miserable peace. But he neither changed place nor countenance, affecting to show he was not afraid, either through courage or that he knew things to be less than they were reported. Quotes closed. Was ever good sense so vile burlesque? Were one to study, to ridicule tacitus, what more miserable stuff, void of all sense and sound, could one make him utter? It puts me in mind of a notable compliment in an address from a learned society to the late king. Quotes open. We perceive that you are one that is not afraid that posterity should make mention of you. Quotes closed. Or words of the like force and beauty. Neither have I picked out these passages invidiously as the worst I have read the whole annel and I know no part of it better done. Section 6 of the last translation of the fourth, fifth and sixth annel. The fourth, fifth and sixth annels are done by another hand and poorly done. In him you find little of the true meaning of tacitus, of his spirit and manner, nothing at all. But frequent deviations from his sense and even from all sense. Tacitus in the character of Sejanus says, Into summa apiscendi libido eiusque causa modo lagitio, et luxus sapius industria ac vegetantia, haud minus noxiai cotiens prando regno figuntur. Who but the translator would have discovered that by these words tacitus meant to declare that quotes open, virtues are as dangerous as vices and they meet with a turbulent spirit aspiring to empire, quotes closed. Yet the translation of this passage is as just as that of many others. Sometimes he drops whole phrases and passages such as he knows not what to make of and often or loses out of sight the meaning of others, however plain. Tacitus says, Ut serias fatturi in agrippinam, cittii in ciparet claudia pulcra sobrina eius postulatur accusante domitio afro. Is ricens praetura modicus dignationis et cuoco facinore properus clarescere. Crimin impudii cittiai adulterum funium, beneficia in principem et devotiones obiectabat. Quotes open, to begin the ruin of agrippina, bracket open, how insipid and defective, bracket closed. Domitius afer lately praetor, bracket open, not a word of modicus dignationis, bracket closed, and ready to engage in anything to gain himself credit, observe the force, bracket closed, accuses claudia pulcra of adultery with funius, bracket open. The words sobrina eius, which explain the rest and the word impudii cittii, one of the articles of the charge are omitted, bracket closed, quotes open, and to have a design on the life of that prince with her charms and person, quotes closed. What prince, fernius was none, Tiberius has not been mentioned in several pages, it is nonsense, and quotes open, a design on his life with her charms and person, quotes closed, multiplies the nonsense. What follows fares not much better, agrippina semper atrox, tom et periculo propinkuo achensa, pergit ad tiberium. Quotes open, perpina always of a violent temper, but at present extremely enraged, runs immediately to Tiberius, et cetera, quotes closed. He drops periculo propinkuo as useless words. Tacitus says that amongst other reasons assigned why Tiberius retired from Rome, some alleged the authority assumed by his mother, who having persuaded Augustus, contrary to his inclinations, to postpone Germanicus and adopt Tiberius, did afterwards upbraid Tiberius with so signal a service and even challenged the empire as her own. Idque Augusta exprobrabat reposcibat. Quotes open, the emperous, says the translator, seemed to reproach him with that favor and requested it for her son, quotes closed. What gibberish, she had but one son, and he had it. She forsooth reproached her son Tiberius for having given him the sovereignty and from the same Tiberius claimed it for the same Tiberius. Sejanus, once when a cave fell in upon Tiberius and his company, covered the emperor with his own body. Maio ex aio, says Tacitus. Quotes open, this admirable and undoubted fidelity, quotes closed, says the translator, which Tacitus never said nor meant. How miserably, too, does he translate ingentium bellorum cladem aquavit malum improvisum eos initium simul et finis extitit. Quotes open, happened a calamity in which we sustained as great a loss as in the greatest defeats, though it was all done in an instant. Quotes closed. I will venture to say that this is as well done as any other part of all the three books. Section 7 of the last translation of the Eleventh Anal The Eleventh Anal is translated by another gentleman, but not with another spirit. It is like the rest, full of feebleness and mistakes and low phrases. I shall here give some instances. The pleaders in a speech to the emperor Claudius in defense of taking fees and in answer to Silius, who alleged against them the example of certain great orators of the former age, who had never taken any, say, facile asinium et mesalam inter Antonium et agustum bellorum primeis refertus et cetera. Quotes open, asinius and mesala, who feathered their dests well in the civil wars, twext Anthony, quotes closed, et cetera. This is the language of a chairman, but of a peace with the rest, such as a king's applying the good fellow, trumping up Arminius' title, being equipped with money. His reputation began to exert itself far and near.  Senators squabbling in the house, a silver mind which bled but a little. It was not come to that yet. Advice hurts not the guiltless. Men had recourse to impudence when their ill actions came to be discovered. Mothers were in the same predicament with them in that matter. Claudius, as he was easily angry, so he was easily pleased. Matrimony, the last comfort of those who give themselves to lewdness. Pasadavits of her lewdness, the vast treasures given to Silius for his drudgery, such cant, jargon, and ill-favored nonsense, is called the translation of Tacitus. Section 8 Of the last translation of the 12th and 13th annals. The two succeeding annals are Englished by another hand, and miserably Englished they are, rather worse than the former. Tis all wretched tittle-tattle, unmeaning and ill-bred, nor could any number of words thrown together at random without thought or idea be more shallow or vulgar, more destitute of ornament or sound. To pass by his top orators, knack of speaking, staving off a war anyways, he being Rectine. The Emperor himself there worthy, yea, gentlemen and senators, do make no other original to themselves, but from thence, and the like gibberish, which occurs in every sentence. I shall here transcribe a passage where he seems to aim at a meaning and to exceed himself. Quotes open. The power his mother had over him, Nero dwindled away by degrees, and Nero fell in love with Actae, a freedwoman, and made Otho and Claudius Senicio the confidants of his new amour, one of which, to wit, Otho was of a consular family, but Senicio a son of one of Caesar's freedmen, who at first, without the mother's knowledge, and since, in spite of all she could do, looked himself by degrees into the Prince's affections by luxury and secret ways that nobody knew, which the best friends he had indulged him in, and were pleased to see him take up and content himself with that woman a thing which did nobody an injury, for he had the misfortune to dislike his wife Octavia, whether it be that we naturally slight what we can have and eagerly pursue what is forbidden of an illustrious family and of an unspotted virtue, and, quotes open, twas feared he might fall into a vein of debauching women of quality if he was checked in that intrigue, but Agrippina could not bear that a freedwoman should nose her, quotes closed, et cetera, that, quotes open, a freedwoman should beard her, quotes closed, says the old translation. How clear, how strong, and how just, this is in the thirteenth book. Take one or two samples more out of the twelfth, quotes open, twas enacted that if they, women, married two slaves without their master's consent they should remain such, quotes closed, bracket open. Who should, the women or the slaves? The former were none and could not remain what they were not, and to say of the latter is nonsense, brackets closed, quotes open, Maria Soranus, consul-elect, moved that palace, whom Caesar said was the first that brought it into the house, should have the praetorial honors and fifteen million sistercies and that Scipio Cornelius might have the thanks of the house for that being descended from the king of Arcadia. He forgot his birth and quality to serve the public and was contented to be one of the prince's servants. Claudius assured them that palace, satisfied with the honor the senate had done him, would live as retireedly as he used to. In short, an act was made, quotes closed, etc. These two passages are as brightly translated as any in the two books, indeed beyond most passages. I shall quote one more. It is in the thirteenth annul, chapter twenty-six. It was importantly urged in the senate that such freedmen, as by abusing their lords, had shown themselves unworthy of their liberty, should remain at the mercy of the said lords and be subject to their former claims. Nec de errant, qui conserrent, says Tacitus, said consules relazionem in cipere non aussi ignaro principae. I.e., quotes open, there were senators too ready to have voted for such a decree, but the consules durst not propose it to the vote without acquainting the emperor, quotes closed. Of all this matter, the translator understood not one word. He says, quotes open, neither were there those wanting who could censure them, Nec de errant, qui conserrent, but the consules durst not without the emperor's knowledge determined the matter, quotes closed. I cannot omit one polite phrase more out of this book. Suleus Senecaum in Crepans says Tacitus, quotes open, he laid it in Seneca's dish, quotes closed, says the translator, chapter forty-two, quotes open, laying it in Seneca's dish, quotes closed, says the old translation.  Behold another specimen, quotes open, at Rome he cheated men of their legacies and wronged the fatherless who were deluded by him. The words of Tacitus are Romae testamenta et orbos vellot indagine ellos capi, chapter forty-two. Section nine of the last translation of the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth annals. A fresh hand has undertaken the three following annals, and by good fortune such a hand has preserved an eminent uniformity with the foregoing. Only he is somewhat more gross.  When a Grappina had escaped the first attempt on her life, she dissembled and seemed not to think it designed, nor to entertain any future apprehensions. Simulata sicuretate, quotes open, under the appearance of security, quotes closed, says the translator. But as Acheronia, one of her maids, had perished in that attempt, she ordered her will to be found, and all her effects to be sealed up. This she did, says Tacitus, without any dissimulation. Id tantum non persimulatio nem, chapter 6, quotes open, she takes all necessary care, says the translator, for the cure of her wound, the testament of Acheronia to be looked out, her coffers to be sealed up, and all things necessary to be done without the least dissimulation, quotes closed. How nicely he understands the original, and how grammatical is his English. Here, however, there seems to be some meaning aimed at, and what follows, even that is wanting, quotes open. The image of the villains, who were stained with the guilt of this parasite, still haunted him, quotes closed. The words of the original are observaban turque maris ilios et litorum gravis ad spectus, chapter 10. In truth, to expose the insipidness and nonsense of these annals, were to transcribe them. In some places he is so gross, that his words will not bear repeating, as particularly where one of Octavius' maids tells Tegelinas, Castoria ese muliebria octaviae quam os ellos. His translation of this is abominable, as well as ridiculous and false, and many such like instances there are in him. I beg leave to quote one short passage more out of this annal. When that lady was by the tyrant divorced, and banished into campania under a guard, indae crevri questus, says Tacitus, necc occulti per vulgam cui minor sapientia, et ex mediocritate fortuna, paucchiora pericula sunt, chapter 60. This is a fine reflection. Observe how execrably it is rendered. Quotes open, upon the clamor of the people who have nothing to lose, are commonly fearless, not out of any love or relenting at his severity. This was remitted. Quotes closed. The fifteenth annal alone is done just like the fourteenth. Wretchedly. Here follows a specimen. Cobullo and Cassenius Petus commanded in the east, sed neque cobulo ai muli patiens, says Tacitus, et Petus cui satis ad gloriam erat, si proximus aberretur desici ebat gesta. Nibel caidis out praidae, un sapatas nomine, tenus ubium, spugnaziones, dictitans, sed tributa ac legis, et pro umbra regis romanum, us victis imposturum, chapter 6. The misfortune was, says the translator, quotes open, the one was impatient of arrival and the other could not endure a superior, and Petus, who ought to have contented himself into cobulo, ever took pleasure to diminish the glory of his actions, abrading him that his victory in taking of towns was imaginary without conquest or plunder, that he would impose laws and demand contributions, introduce the roman power in the place of their knights, and render them a mere shadow, quotes closed. He often seems to be without the least glimmering of Tacitus' meaning, or any meaning, and puts down a parcel of words at random. How clearly does he English? Provisis exemplis claudii nai, abnumantina cladis, quotes open, resolving to follow the example of Numantian and the Claudine defeat, which practice they thought they might justify since the Parthians were at this time more powerful than the Carthaginians or the Samnites, quotes closed, brackets open. Were they in truth? What a discovery is here, brackets closed. Neque aeandem vim santibus etelico populo aotwainis romani imperii aimulis. He goes on, they were now beginning to talk that the ancients were always commended for their address in suiting all things to the times and securing a safe retreat when fortune should frown upon them. This is another discovery, which he has made from these words, dalidam quoque et laudatam antiquatem, quotians fortuna contra daret saluti consuluise. Chapter 13, that is, quotes open, these same venerable ancients, so very stubborn and invincible and so much adored, always consulted self-preservation as often as pressed by the assaults of a calamitous fortune, quotes closed. When Paitis had submitted to such shameful conditions from the Parthians, he amongst the rest made a bridge over the river Arsanius and to hide his disgrace pretended it was to shorten his own march. When in truth it was done in obedience to the commands of the Parthians as a monument of their superiority and conquest, namque aeis usi fuit nostri per diversum iera. Chapter 15, quotes open, it being commodious to them, quote the translator, and not in any manner to molest us, quotes closed, were ever two meanings more remote, he often adds words of his own to those of Tacitus and often drops many more of the original, sometimes whole sentences. Tacitus says they're prevailed than a pestilent custom of making fraudulent adoptions such as candidates for office as had no children of their own, and as soon as the election was over they instantly dismissed such as they had occasionally adopted. This abuse raised a storm from such as were real parents who, having applied to the senate with warm representations against such fallacious dealings in others and such injury done to themselves, add, sebe promisa legum dio expectata in ludibrium verti quando, quis sine, solicitudine, parents, sine loctu orbis longa patrum, vota repente adai quaret. Chapter 19, all this is dropped by the translator and the following jargon of his own inserted. They took children to quit them at their fancy in contempt of those laws while they had a great many privileges for care or sorrow the other with ease enjoyed the same. Quotes closed. I am afraid I have tired my reader as I have done myself with such a dull deduction of stupidities. I did not at first intend to say anything of the former translations. I took it for granted that every man who had seen them must have condemned them as pitiful and bad as they really are. But when upon publishing my proposals I found that some who by their titles and professions should be learned others who by their high quality ought to have taste and elegance had commended the former translation and uttered their despair of seeing a better. I found it necessary to give some account of that performance which I think to be as low, defective and wretched as anything in print.  It is much worse than the old translation which is exceeding bad. It is in my own defense as well as in defense of Tacitus that I have censured it and against my inclination. It looks indeed as if the translators themselves had no opinion of it since they have not as is usual said one word about it by way of preface. This is what Mr. Dryden particularly never used to omit doing. Why did he omit it now in the translation of a work of such name and weight? As far as the sixth annul there is a translation, too, of Lausue's notes but done with great ignorance and errors. End of Discourse 1 Read by Father Xyle of Detroit, Michigan December 2007 Section 2 of the Complete Works of Tacitus edited by Thomas Gordon This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Recorded by Graham Redmon The Complete Works of Tacitus to which are prefixed political discourses upon that author edited and translated by Thomas Gordon with introductory essays by Thomas Gordon Volume 1 Discourse 2 upon Tacitus and his writings Part 1 Section 1 The Character of Tacitus As to the character of Tacitus and his writings he was the greatest orator, statesman and historian of his time. He had long frequented the bar. He had passed through all the high offices of state. He was Edile Preter Consul and after long acquaintance with business and men he applied himself to collect observations and to convey the fruits of his knowledge to posterity under the agreeable dress of a history. For this task he was excellently qualified. No man had seen more, scarce any man had ever thought so much or conveyed his thoughts with greater force and vivacity. A mighty genius for which no conception or design was too vast, a powerful orator who abounds in great sentiments and description, yet a man of consummate integrity who though he frequently agitates the passions never misleads them, a masterly historian who draws events from their first sources and explains them with a redundancy of images and a frugality of words, a profound politician who takes off every disguise and penetrates every artifice, an upright patriot zealous for public liberty and the welfare of his country and a declared enemy to tyrants and to the instruments of tyranny, a lover of humankind, a man of virtue who adores liberty and truth and everywhere adorns and recommends them, who abhors falsehood and iniquity, despises little arts, exposes bad ones, and shows upon all occasions by the fate and fall of great wicked men, by the anxiety of their souls, by the precariousness of their power, by the uncertainty or suddenness of their fate, what a poor price greatness obtained is for goodness lost, and how infinitely persecuted virtue is preferable to smiling and triumphant wickedness. Germanicus, under all his hardships and disfavor, is a happier man than Tiberius with all his power and empire, happier in peace of mind, happier in his fame and memory. Tijelinus is a great favorite with Nero, but detested by all the rest of the world and fearful of all men. Seneca is disliked by the emperor, but universally beloved and regretted. Tessitus is a fine gentleman who suffers nothing pedantic or low, nothing that is trifling or indecent to fall from his pen. He is also a man of wit, not such a one as his fond of conceits and the quaintness of words, but a wit that is grave, majestic and sublime, one that blends the solemnity of truth with the fire of imagination and touches the heart rather than the fancy, yet for the better reception of truth pleases and awakens the fancy. The telling of truth is dry and unaffecting, but to enliven it with imagery is describing it, and everyone knows the advantages that description has overbear narration, hence the force of fine painting, though in my opinion the orator has the advantage of the painter as words can multiply ideas better than the pencil, throw them thicker together, and inflame them more. What piece of appellies could have animated the Athenians against Philip of Macedon like one of Demosthenes's orations? What picture of love can equal the description of that passion by Lucretius, the noblest wit of all the Latin poets? It is hardly, I believe, possible for colours to carry images higher than they are by Michelangelo carried in his piece of the last day, yet I believe it not only possible, but easy, to make a description of that day more affecting than the sight of that celebrated piece. Section 2. How much he excels in description and force. Painting in words is the strongest painting, and in that art Tacitus excels to amazement. His images are many, but close and thick, his words are few, but pointed and glowing, and even his silence is instructive and affecting. How justly does he represent that noble sullenness and disdain of the wife of Arminius when brought with other captives before Germanicus? Inerent et feminae nobiles interquasux Arminii e adenque felia segestis mariti magis cramparentis animo neque victa in lacrimas neque voque suplex compressis intracinum manibus gravidum uterum intuens. A circumstance of distress more moving than this last could not be devised, and what words or exclamations or tears could raise compassion so effectively as the representation of a spirit too great to weep or complain of a grief too mighty to be uttered? The march of Germanicus and his army to the forest of Teutburg to bury the bones of Verus and his legions there massacred by the Germans. The description of that camp with the revival of the circumstances of that tragical event and the sympathy and resentments of the soldiers all beautifully displayed with great force and brevity with equal tenderness and horror. Permoto ad miseratio nem omni qui aderat exerchitu obpropinquos amicos denique obcasus bellorum et sortem hominum incadent moistos locos visuque ac memoria deformes prima varicastra lato ambitù et dimensis principiis trium legionum menus ostentabant dein semirruto valo humili fossa achizai jam reliquiae con sedisi intelligabantur medio campi albentio ossa ut fugerant ut restiterant disiecta vel agerata agiacae bant fragminate lorum ecuorumque atus semul truncis arborum antifixor ora lucis propinquis barbarae arae aputquas tribunos ac primorum ordinum cantorioneis mactaverant cladius aeos superstitaeis pugnam aut vincula ellepsi referei bant hic cacidisi legatos elli craptas acuilas primum ube vulmos varo adactum ube infilicae dextra et suo ictum mortem in venerit quot tribunale concionatus arminius quot patibula captivis quaiscrobes ut ques signis et acuilis persuperbiam in lucerit ictur romanus qui aderat executus sextum post cladius anum trium legionum ossa nullo noscenti alienas reliquias ansuorum humo tegeret omnes ut conjunctus ut consanguinius aucta in hostem era et infensi con debant here is eloquence and description what can be added, what can be taken away his style is everywhere warm and pathetic and he never informs the understanding or entertains the imagination but he kindles the affections you are not only convinced by his sentiments but governed by them charmed with them and grows zealous for them this is a trial of the power and skill of a writer this the drift and glory of persuasion and eloquence and this the talent of tacitus to display tyrants and tyranny he chooses the strongest words and figures fekinora ac flagitia sua ipsi quocque in suplicium verterant si recludant o tyrannora mentes posse ad spicci leniatus et ictus quando ut corpora ver beribus itus aivitia libidinae melis consultis animus dilacorator quipetiberium non fortuna non solitudines protegabant quintormenta pectoris suasque ipsi poinus fatorator it was his business and design to lay open the iniquity and horrors of their misrule saiviusa continuus acusationes felacis amicitias penicium inocentium you see the bloody hands of the executioners Rome swimming in the blood of her own citizens and all the rage of unrelenting tyranny undantem perdonos sanguinem outmanus carnificum you see the bands of accusers let loose may hired to destroy and breathing death and exile saivitiam oratorum acusationes minitandium delatores per primia eliquiae bantor you see the barbarous outrages of an insolent and merciless soldiery conctus sanguinem ferro flamisque miscant you see madmen bear rule these mad rulers governed and made worse by slaves, villains, and harlots yet all these monsters adored their persons wickedness and even their fury sanctified iniquity exalted, virtue trod underfoot laws perverted, righteousness and truth depressed and banished every worthy man doomed to scaffolds, rocks and dungeons the basest of all men pronouncing that doom and making a prey or a sacrifice of the best fear and distrust and treachery prevailing the destroyers themselves haunted with the perpetual dread of destruction at last overtaken by it yet seldom leaving better in their room all these melancholy scenes you see exposed in colours strong and moving the thoughts are great, the phrase elevated and the words chaste and few it is all a picture, whatever he says you see and all that you see affects you it puzzles one to give instances because there are so many in every page how many affecting images are there in these few words near the beginning of the first annul quotus quesque reliquuous quirempublican vedicet how mournful too and expressive yet how plain are these which immediately follow Egitta verso chivitartis statu nihil us quam prisci et integri moris as well as those a little before reibus novis aucti tuta et presentia quam vetera et periculosa marlendt with what thunder and vehemence does Arminius rouse the carouscans his countrymen to arms when his wife became a captive to the Romans and his child a slave though yet unborn egregium patrem magnanimum imperatorem fortem exerchitum quorum tot manus una mulli aculam avexerint sebi tres legiones totidem legatos pro cobuissi non enim se proditione neque adversus feminus gravidus sed palam adversus amatos belum tractare cerni adhuc gamanorum in lucus signa romana choleret segestes victam ripam redoret filio saccadotium et cetera in how few words does he comprise a long and perplexed debate in the council held by Germanicus how to proceed with the mutinous legions au gabat metum gnarus superior exerchitus romanae seditiones et si omiterator ripa invasurus hostis ac si auxilia et socchi e adversum ebscadentes legiones quivile belum suscipi periculosa severitas flagitiosa largitio siu nihil militi siu omnia concadarenta in ancipiti reis publica egeta et cetera section three further instances of the justness of his genius and of his great thoughts his account of the persecutions of Germanicus with his last words and amiable character makes a fine tragedy so does the death of Seneca so does that of the conspirators against Nero with what magnanimity and calmness to sulpicious asper the centurion answer the brutal tyrant when asked why he had conspired against his life known eliter tot flagitis eius subvenieri potuissi with what silence and firmness did the consul versteinus die though he was Nero's old companion and friend and unconcerned in the conspiracy and no crime nor accuser against him Vigens ad hook balneo infertor caledar aqua mer satur nulla edita vocae quase miseroretur how beautiful how deep and just are his observations upon human nature mollez incalamitate humani anime mobiles ad superstitonem per cul-sise semul mentes cupidine in genii humani lubentius obscuracradi neque morum spanendus nisi quad palpertatem praikipu malorum credeibat vivorum ut magna admiratio ita kensuria dificilis eandem vertutem admirantibus qui irrescabantur maneibat admiratio viri et fama sed odorant benifikia eio usqui leita sunt d'un vedento rexolvi pose obimultum antecasere pro gratia odium reditur exacto pas caleradie novissimum malorum fuit laititia rumore populi qui neminem sinii aimulo sinit minore spae veniae criscit vinculum skelleris populus novarum rareum cupiens pabidusque vulgus eadem prabitate interfectum in sectator quavi ventem foverat hamastili and profound are those upon government primas dominandis pays in aduo ubisis ingressus adesis studia administeris adum eodem lochi patentia met concordia mesi patentia cautis concili istutias habetur mayor elonginkuo reverentia principibus praikipu rareum ad famam dirigendo in sochiabile regnum cupidou regni fratre et filia potio scarum cui implacabilius irasquebatua tiberius silentio tramisit interlege bantua artes sed pas obsequii in aio ne deprehenderentur insuma fortuna aqueus quadvalidius these I do not quote as the finest thoughts in tacitus but only such as occur to me he paints thoughts and faculties, men and passions, tyranny and slaves his imagination is boundless yet never outruns his judgment his wisdom is solid and vast yet always enlivened by his imagination his designing is great his drawing just his coloring beautiful see the description of a pestilence at Rome domius corporibus exanimis itinera funeribus concili bantua non sexus non aitas periculo vacua servitia perinde ac ingenua plebes raptim extinguii intercondiugum et liberorum lamenta qui dum acident dum deflent seipe aodem rogo crema bantua equitum senatorum cui interitus cramvis promiscui minus filibilis erant tanquam comune mortalitate seiviti and brinkipis privineerent under attirent a plague was a blessing who but tacitus could have said as he does of the ancient Germans argentum et aurum propiti i an irati dii negaverent dubito all that afterwards of the same people miradiversitate naturai cum i idem homines seekament inertiam qui etem odorint all that of the satonis a particular clan of Germans who were under the government of a woman intentum non modo a libertate said etiam ar servitiute degenerant these are such instances of discernment, sagacity and happy expression as few writings can show by them and a thousand more it is manifest that tacitus saw everything in a true and uncommon light and his reflections are like mirrors where human nature and government are exhibited in their proper size and colors I cannot help thinking that to be a bold and gallant saying of Boyokalus to the Roman general who refused him a mansion for himself and his people in the vacant lands of Frisia and thence provoked him to implore the sun and stars quasi coram in terrogabat vellentne contuere innane solum potios mare super funderent adversus terrami eruptores deus a nobis terrami inqua vivamus inqua moriamu at known protest what a sublime thought is that of his concerning the Fenians the most savage and wretched race this of all the wild Germans their clothing, skins, their bed, the earth, their food, the grass destitute of horses, houses and arms the thick branches of trees their only shelter against tempests and the ravening beasts here they find cradles and protection for their babes here live the old men and hither resort the young yet this miserable life they prefer to that of sweating at the plough and to the pains of rearing houses they thirst not after the fortunes of others they have no anxiety about preserving their own so that they hoped for nothing that was not theirs and having nothing of their own could fear to lose nothing Securis as Tacitus adversus homines Securis adversus deus Remdificillimam ad secutis sunt Ut ilisne voto quidem opus sit Section 4 the morality of Tacitus and his spirit virtuous and humane as obvious too as his other great qualities is his love of mankind of civil liberty and of private and public virtue his book is a great tableture of the ugliness and horrors of tyranny of the scandal and infamy of servitude and debasement of the loveliness of virtue and a free spirit of the odiousness of vice and sicker fancy such was his sympathy for the sufferings and severe lot of the Romans under Tiberius that he is glad of a digression from home and keeps thence as long as he can to relieve his soul from attending to domestic evils Duabus, Istartibus, Gesta, Conjunxi Cuorequiescaret animus are domesticis malis He grieves for the slavish spirit for the stupid tameness of the Romans under the tyranny of the detestable Nero so much Roman blood wantonly shed by that monster is a load upon his soul and oppresses it with sorrow patientia servilis tantumque sanguinis dormi perditum fatigant animum et maistitia restringunt he delights in good times in public liberty and virtuous reigns and delights to praise them such as those of Nerva and Trajan rara temporum felicitate ubisentire cuivellis et cuicentias dicere liquette in what a difference strained as he speak of the foregoing emperors nobilitas oppes omisigestique honores procrimine et obvertutes cattissimum exitium he glories, however, that the worst and most faithless times produced many instances of friendship and generous fidelity known tamin adiovertutum sterile seculum utnone et bona exempla prodiderit he is fond of a virtuous character, as that of Labio Labio incorrupta libertate et ob ed farma calibratio such as that of Lepidus hun cago lepidum temporibus illis gravim et sapientem verum fuisicomperio nam pleere qui absaivis adulati onibus alliorum in melios flexit and that of Lucius Piso chief pontiff nullius servilis sententii sponte auctor how amiable are the death and last words of Lucius eruntius like those of a patriot and a prophet but how vile everywhere and even miserable and insecure are tyrants, flatterers and the ministers of iniquity what he says of the first I have quoted above and against the other hear his honest indignation tempera infecta et adulati oni sordida fuere faida qui et nimia cincerent adulatio perinde ankepsi nulla et ube nimia est delatoris genus hominum in exitium pubicum repertum pernicium alliis ac postremo cibi in venare what an odious insect is vatinius what a horrible villain tygillinus what infamous sycophants are capito and vitelius and what a shocking parasite is serenus the accuser of his father and a general accuser section five the style of tacitus how pertinent and happy his obscurity a charge of the mottons only besides the grandeur and dignity of his phrase he is remarkable for a surprising brevity but let his words be ever so few his thought and matter are always abundant his expression is like the dress of papyr Sabina described by himself velata parte oris ne satiaret aspectum velqueer seek decabat he starts the idea and leaves the imagination to pursue it the sample he gives you is so fine that you are presently curious to see the whole piece and then you have your share in the merit of the discovery a compliment which some able writers have forgot to pay to their readers I cannot help thinking Mr. Locke a great deal too wordy and that the plainness of his propositions as well as their strength suffers often by an explanation over diffuse Dr. Tillotson's style is much better indeed very fine but takes up too much room it is likely he chose it as fit for popular discourses since it is plain from the vivacity of his parts and the many fine turns found in his writings that he could have been very sententious these two great names are by no man reverenced more than I reverence them and without malignity I mention them as I do that of the worthy Lord Clarendon whose language is weighty and grave but encumbered and even darkened I might say flattened with a multiplication of words style is a part of genius and Tacitus had one peculiar to himself a sort of a language of his own one fit to express the amazing vigor of his spirit and that redundancy of reflections which for force and frequency are to be equalled by no writer before or since besides the course and fluency of his narration is almost everywhere broken by persons whom he introduces speaking and debating in so much that a great part of his history comes out of the mouths of other people and in expressions suitable to their several characters it is plain too that the older he grew the more he pruned and curtailed his style for his histories are much more copious and flowing than his annals and thus what has been by others reckoned a fault was in him the effect of his judgment neither were his works intended for the populace but for such as govern states or such as attended to the conduct of governors nor were the style and Latin ever so plain would they ever be understood by such as do not as Plutarch came to understand the Roman tongue by understanding their affairs Tacitus is to be known by knowing human nature and the elements and mechanism of government it is madness to wish for the manner and redundancy of Livy in the writings of Tacitus they wrote at different times and of governments differently formed Tacitus had transactions of another sort to describe and other sorts of men for by government men are changed the crooked arts of policy, the false smiles of power the jealousy, fury and wantonness of princes uncontrolled the flattery of the grandees the havoc made by the accusers and universal debasement of all men matter chiefly for reflection, complaints and rebuke nobis in ato et inglorious labour moisture urbis rays et cetera Livy had another few and more scope the history of a commonwealth rising, forming and conquering perpetual victories and matter of panegyric and his pen flowed like the prosperity of the state ingentia bella, ex pugnationes urbium fuzos captosque reges discordias consulum adversus tribunus agrarias frumentariasque leges plebis et optimatium catamina libero egressu memoraband Douglas he could have adopted another style if he would perhaps the style of Livy as I think this very quotation shows but Tacitus had another view and different topics nor would another style, the easy and numerous style of Livy have answered his purpose I fancy too that nobody who knows Tacitus would wish him to have written in a strain different from what he has done there are charms in his manner and words as well as in his thoughts and he wears the only dress that would become him it is amazing that this obscurity of his should never be mentioned by any of the ancients who mention him it is a fault discovered by the moderns though in my opinion common to him with other classical writers nor has he puzzled the commentators more than Horace Cicero, Pliny, Salus, etc. his Latin is truly pure and classical he has few or no words which had not been used by approved writers nor does he often give new ideas to old words if his works were no wise obscure to men of sense when he composed them as we have no reason to think it is insolence and folly in us to reckon his obscurity a fault it is a dead language which he writes in and he wrote 1700 years ago when Tacitus the emperor directed copies of his books to be placed in all the libraries and for their better preservation to be transcribed ten times every year he ordered no grammarian to explain his abstruse places though the historian had been then dead near 200 years great writers are in their manner and phrase a law and authority to themselves and not confined to the rules that fill the heads or grammars of small wits and pedants Milton has a style of his own and rules for writing of his own and who that tastes his genius would wish him more fashionable and exact or to have written otherwise I am even pleased with the jarrings of Milton's phrases but here I chiefly mean his poetical style of his prose I shall make mention hereafter when the subject varies so should the style that of Tacitus is marvelously suited to his subject and design had it been more familiar it had neither been so just nor so beautiful to me nothing is more so than the manner of Tacitus the words and phrases are admirably adapted to his matter and conceptions and make impressions sudden and wonderful upon the mind of man the doleful condition of the emperor Vitellius when deserted by his fortune and all men is strong and tragical as imagination and words can make it so in lacrimante and the reason he gives for this is judicious and fine deformitas exitus misericordium abstulerat what follows is in the same affecting strain as are the first sensible approaches of his calamity Vitellius, captain Urbe, Aventinum, Indomum, Uxoris, Cellular Fertur, Utsidium, Lattebra, Vitaviset, Terakinam, Perfugaret, Deien, Mobilitate, Ingenii, and Quainatura Pavores est cum omnia metuenti presentia maxima displicarent in pallatium regreditor vastum desertumque, dilapsis etiam infimis servorum out occursum aeus declinantibus. Who would blame Tacitus for a paucity of words when he conveys so many images in so few? Is habitus animorum fuit ut pessimum facinus audarent pauchi pluris vellent omniais patarentur where can there be a happier expression than that concerning Galba when the empire was already rent from him and he knew it not? Ignorus interim Galba et sacris sintentus fatigabat alieni yam imperii deios when Otho proclaimed emperor by no more than three and twenty soldiers was advancing to the camp et palchitate salutantium trepidus the behavior and acquiescence of those he met in his way are accounted for with surprising brevity and justness ali e conschientia plericue miraculo paus clamore et gladiis paus silentio animum ex eventus sumpturi there is infinite pathos in what he says of the omens and phenomena which would served during the civil wars and the strife of princes coilo teracue prodigia et fulminum monitus et futororum prissagia lighter tristia ambiguous manifesta what can be more solemn sounding and sublime even in Lucretius when Nero was distracing himself and the Roman state and basing his person to that of a player upon the public stage how pathetically is the behavior and spirit of Borus described in a few words ad starbat Borus myrens et laudans section six a general character of his works there is no end of specimens and examples all over a wonderful book full of wisdom full of virtue of astonishing strokes of genius and superior sense yet he seems not to value himself upon his great thoughts the finest things fall from him like common things he says them naturally and never dwells upon one because he has always more to utter and you want to stand still and ruminate you have no time he draws or rather forces you forward and the next thought strikes you as much so does the third and all of them and you go on reading and wondering yet wishing for leisure to ponder and recollect but he gives you none for from first to last the present reflection is always the best eternal good sense and will bear an eternity of time and censure it is no wiser kin to your pretty trifles of humor and fancy that just tickle the imagination but go no deeper and please for a day his beauties are solid and upon the strictest examination discover no paint or tinsel his wisdom and instruction are inexhaustible and his works consequently an everlasting feast I have seen several performances of tolerable length and notable reputation all derived from so many short sentences of Tacitus well wire drawn and paraphrased he is indeed a fund for writers who have discretion and style but want depth there is a fine short character of Tacitus in Owens epigrams Verachem fake it probitas natura segaachem obscorum brevitas te gravitas quibrevem section seven Tacitus vindicated from the imputation of deriving events from councils too subtle and malevolent he is accused too of over much subtlety and refining and of deriving the actions of his princes even the most innocent and plausible from crooked designs and a base heart and of imputing to craft and politics what was often no more than the effect of inclination and passion a charge in my opinion entirely groundless Tacitus describes things and men as they are shows particulars acting agreeably to their characters their situation and views and represents councils flowing from such sources only as were likely to produce them let us examine his reign of Tiberius for which she is chiefly censured the first feat of this rain was the murder of a gripper the grandson of Augustus Tiberius ordered it and denied it and threatened the centurion who was the executioner that he should answer for it to the senate this is the account given by Tacitus and the same is given by Suetonius the former adds that it was done from jealousy of state and for the removal of a rival and what other reason is to be given for he had shown how improbable it was that the same had been ordained by Augustus and ended as Suetonius to testifies nor was anything more natural than his apprehensions of Germanicus a young prince popular above all men and at the head of a great army who wanted him for their emperor in the room of Tiberius this is matter of fact and well attested now where is the extreme refining to represent Tiberius trying to remove such a dangerous man one of such good pretenses and powerful interest first from his faithful legions and then from home forever though at the same time he flattered him extolled him and heaped honors upon him all this is but the common road of such courts when they have the same designs and fears it is usual in Turkey to load a bashful with imperial presence to bestow upon him some great government and to murder him before he arrived at it is not power a jealous and artificial thing full of fears and wiles and is not Tiberius allowed by all men to have been a prince of infinite distrust craft and cruelty what meant he by making great governors of provinces and yet never suffering them to go there for a course of years nor even out of Rome though they still held the name what meant he by continuing others in the actual possession of provinces for a long tract of years may frequently to the end of their life was it not his distrust of the former and that as to the latter he could not make a safer choice he was not afraid to choose any yet Tacitus far from diving into his politics in this matter or being subtle and dogmatical about it gives you the sentiments of others the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the


Moncopox is a virus that can cause serious illness and has the potential to spread rapidly. The virus is transmitted through contact with infected animals or their bodily fluids and can be passed between humans via direct contact or indirectly through contaminated objects. The virus is known to replicate in the cytoplasm and requires its own RNA processing machinery, which includes a capping mechanism. Researchers have recently identified a protein called VP39, which is responsible for the capping process. They have also developed a new class of compounds called synefungens, which are able to block the activity of VP39 and prevent the virus from replicating. These compounds have been shown to be effective against other viruses, suggesting they may be useful in treating future outbreaks of Moncopox. This article was authored by Jan Sillon, Martin Klimer, Thomas Otava, and others. We are article.tv, links in the description below.