Concordance to The Crooked Timber of Humanity

All impressions of the first edition (1990/1991) use the same typesetting, and therefore the same pagination. The second edition (2013) was completely reset. This concordance facilitates the conversion of page references to the first edition into page references to the second. The text of the second edition, which has been revised throughout, and added to, should be used in all new and revised translations. The concordance does not include the 2013 foreword or appendix.

First
edition		First line (first edition) Second
edition
1There are, in my view, two factors 1
2 such ends of life are based. These beliefs 2
3 social thinkers, of the mid-nineteenth century 3
4 solutions to the central problems existed 4
5 impressed by the vast new realms 5
6 discovery of these truths; in the third 6
7 reason would triumph; universal harmonious 7
8 how to seize opportunities and use 8
9 itself and of its relations to its own 9
10 Machiavelli conveyed the idea of 10
11 ‘I prefer coffee, you prefer champagne. 11
12 know what they mean. If they are human, they 12
13 for the liberty of others, to allow justice 13
14 accepted as unbreakable law; or 14
15 This seems to me a piece of metaphysical 15
16 the motive, the millions slaughtered 16
17 If the old perennial belief in the 17
18 maintain a precarious equilibrium 18
19 in a moment of illumination, ‘Out of 19
20 The idea of a perfect society is a very old 20
21 is, Utopia cannot be Utopia, for then 22
22 What is common to all these worlds 23
23 inspiring anti-Roman revolts 24
24 notion of the broken unity and its 25
25 with one another. At best, these truths 26
26 Let me continue with this argument 27
27 the nature which surrounds him 28
28 by Socrates, developed by Plato 29
29 faculties and powers. Crime, vice, 30
30 better to dominate them and exploit 31
31 drink, shelter and security; all men want 32
32 possibility that the Christian and the 33
33 obey Rome. Why should Franks, Teutons 34
34 plants and minerals, in zoology, botany, chemistry 35
35 that which is irrational in man. 36
36 height which it reached in the quattrocento 37
37 dross – the perishable goods of 38
38 is an enormous fallacy. Homer is not 39
39 own, whose behaviour, reactions 40
40 man’s or a people’s nature, which depends 41
41 Weltanschauung. For the young Friedrich 43
42 Not so those who are influenced by the 44
43 those of modern Frenchmen, then a 45
44 as it has remained to this day. It is clear that 46
45 pessimism of the bourgeoisie made uneasy 47
46 organisation of human life. But enough progress 48
47 thing’; good government versus self-government 49
48 it might yet prevent mutual destruction 50
49 The study of their own past has long been 51
50 sinful or foolish, but real and unalterable 52
51 consequences of their activities, what 53
52 the peaks, not the valleys, of the 54
53 another on the banks of the Oxus 55
54 The very notion of cultures – of 56
55 studied seriously and sympathetically 57
56 immutable natural law, whether as 58
57 not celebrate this as a virtue 59
58 vision, to set aside which in response 60
59 generalised types of Livy or Tacitus 61
60 other visions and values, but never wholly 62
61 In a sense, the mere existence of an 63
62 critical methods insufficient – but the 64
63 and in some ways the most formidable opponent 65
64 to us, and in our words, not theirs; 66
65 of expression, their values, outlook 67
66 quod semper,quod ubique 68
67 not, for that very reason, possess 70
68 up with a culture some aspects of which 71
69 by his own conscious aims as well 72
70 It is an accepted truth that the central 73
71 disease, insecurity, poverty, misery, injustice 73–4
72 universality of ultimate human values, founded 75
73 centaurs and dragons, miracles and prodigies 76
74 every kind of civilised man there is Diderot’s 76–7
75 each stage of the historical cycle of 77–8
76 a systematically misleading, at worst scarcely 79
77 relativism of Vico and Herder which 80
78 appearance or illusion and reality entailed 81
79 cruel and avaricious élite of ‘heroes’ 82
80 by different societies at various times, or by 83
81 [illus]tration of this view. 84
82 At the heart of the best-known type of modern 85
83 we shall see that the values of these remote 86
84 but no progress towards an optimum. But for 87
85 Relativism is not the only alternative to 88
86 see other worlds through the eyes of those whom 89
87 society. Herder is not being inconsistent 90
88 in his polemic against Voltaire’s disparaging 91
89 one with the Enlightenment: there is only one truth 92
90 entirely, a legacy of the schools of thought which 93
91 The personality and the outlook of Joseph de Maistre 95
92 to be fitted into the familiar categories 96
93 and Novalis, of illuminists and Martinists 97
94 the doctrines and the acts of the French Revolution 98
95 him) calls him the ‘hangman’s friend’ 99
96 future issue. This is a point of view 100
97 The problem uppermost in public consciousness 101
98 Consequently attempts to analyse this state 102
99 destinies of men and nations. Conservatives 103
100The Constitution of 1795, just like its 104
101power, whether by monarchs or popular assemblies 105
102relatively trivial differences. The two men 106
103Joseph de Maistre was born in 1753 107
104his life long ecumenism – his yearning for 108
105not unlike that to be found in conservative 109
106and power, and of course an unyielding adversary 110
107[re]ligion and ethics, while Hume did not 111
108and knowledge of them, if it were spread 112
109harmony and eternal peace, the necessity 113
110Bourdaloue, in fact did not owe a great deal 114
111Marquis de Condorcet? The very opposite; that 115
112This is Maistre’s famous, terrible vision 116
113founded on the social contract between the quick 116
114Yet life is not for Maistre a meaningless slaughter 117
115or his society’s ends, to perceive them 117–8
116maintenance of the fixed and rigid hierarchy 119
117horizontal cross, he raises his arm; there 120
118This is not a mere sadistic meditation about 121
119masters must do the duty laid upon them 121
120such creatures they would have made themselves 122
121advances to subject him to the same fate if he can 123
122all it is thought to be, mad and destructive. 124
123be more irrational than marriage and the family 125
124justified only when it derives from that tendency 126
125the world of grace and that of nature 127
126nation, that is by a political faith 128
127reactionaries who immured themselves against 129
128Rome, but much the best that can be achieved 130
129Revolution drew weapons from that great armoury 131
130whereby it can be questioned, and omnipotent 132
131divine providence, even though they may not 133
132or madness that is at work. 134
133The eighteenth century is full of paeans 135
134plunged into cruel massacres, what are these rights? 136
135conservatives and churchmen. More immediately 137
136but against usurpers. The Spanish Inquisition 138
137Pascal, Maistre decides that he owed nothing 139
138benefit of a private individual. If a man has 140
139Protestantism had disrupted the unity of mankind 141
140Maistre’s, as it is in Tolstoy’s, doctrine 142
141Bonald firmly deny. To think is to use symbols 143
142enough in the face of the militant lack of historical 144
143memories of a people or a church, to reform 145
144and the group of advisers with whom Tsar Alexander 146
145supposed that society was an artificial 147
146which shallow thinkers who ignore both facts 148
147again: ‘Every time something is perfected in 150
148government.’ He detests it because it is arbitrary 150
149(which men like Robespierre are deluded enough 151
150said Bonald (quoting Bossuet and echoed by Dostoevsky 152
151especially after the Emperor’s liberal phase was 153
152it on religious authority – control by priests 154
153effect rigorously followed in Russia for half a 155
154Again: what an inexplicable delusions, whereby a 156
155which might be conceived by ignorant or 157
156which would lead to the dismemberment of that 158
157father, a loyal, delightful and sensitive friend 159
158friends have left to the sweetness of his character 160
159more darkness. Voltaire hated the Roman Church so 161
160shock treatment, has entered into modern political 162
161An eminent philosopher once remarked that, in 163
162pattern in which what had earlier seemed to be a casual 164
163possessed by men before the Flood, of which 165
164by it. What then of written constitutions? 166
165And whence do prelates, nobles, great officers of 167
166proposition that whatever is written is a feeble 168
167social scientists, the bold political and economic 169
168sharp, by no means useless, antidote to their 170
169among the first to use the term ‘société 171
170said, ‘… it is like an orang-utan among the apes’ 172
171is by that token the instrument chosen by providence 173
172do, by deduction from such general notions as the 174
173mystery which alone resisted sceptical enquiry 175
174sinful, helpless human beings, torn by contradictory 176
175It is by now a melancholy commonplace that no century 186
176assumed, was equally visible to all rational minds 187
177outside it; so that if there is a conflict between my 188
178but ‘scientific’ analysis will always reveal 189
179try to save their reactionary brothers from defeat 190
180men to look on many millions of their fellow men 191
181world is but a fragment, and in my framework 192
182interpreters of God – churches and priests 193
183common to all men – that the needs were all 194
184opponents believed that every man could in 195
185neuroses, forms of personal or socialmalaise 196
186heart and mind and soul had not been perverted could 197
187nothing that can be called ‘my’ as against 198
188concepts of biological drives and goals and those of 199
189expert, the sage – in virtue of which indeed he was 200
190knows to be his mission, of what the inner voices tell 201
191sovereign will on dead matter, afterwards so 202
192enters into life as part of its essence, not as something 203
193acquired in the early nineteenth century an absolute 204
194Napoleon, whose art is the making of states and peoples 205
195other tribes, to this man and this civilisation but 206
196walls and hedges against the chaos caused by absence 207
197classical tradition, and had entered deeply into 208
198private feelings, the composition of one’s own blood 209
199‘liquidation’, and Trotsky, in an equally 210
200Too many men were prepared to defend their principles 211
201sometimes even denied that there is a source to seek 212
202equality, we may sacrifice some degree of 213
203we accept them? May it not be true, as some 214
204little finger, or someone who genuinely sees no harm in 215
205do not recognise them, they must be lying or deceiving 216
206evidence, whether they pretend otherwise or not 217–8
207The history of ideas is a comparatively new field 219
208realism; or tolerance, even though these virtues 220
209which seems to me to have become articulate in 221
210prophets and seers, the doctrine and tradition of 222
211from it, or some other breach in the original harmony 223
212rest on the three pillars of social optimism in the west 224
213Communist Manifesto to modern technocrats 225
214other, emotion has never been absent from human 226
215the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning 227
216purchased only at the price of putting chains on the free 228
217determinism that reigns in nature – on which 229
218follow only through some mistaken conception of what 230
219sprang from wounded pride. The German reaction at first 231
220Leisewitz, Lenz, and even the gentle Carl Philipp Moritz 232
221force, social or natural, that is celebrated. Nothing 234
222children by him, she is a true tragic heroine 235
223Nowhere was Germanamour propre more 236
224delicate plants which great conquering empires 237
225universally right in Kant, but something which 238
226that I am what I am, aware of my aims, my nature 239
227must identify my own finite desires if I am to 240
228before I have painted it? Where indeed? 241
229Manfred, Beppo, Conrad, Lara, Cain – who 242
230again, ‘God brooded over the void and a world 244
231genius but by his heroic readiness to live and die 245
232sociological – no less than that of common sense 246
233living is discovered to be the dead; the organic 247
234Dostoevsky’s underground man, and Kafka’s 248
235Marx to integrate the tensions, paradoxes and 249
236bold, universal, once-and-for-all panacea. It may 250
237as individual liberty and social equality, spontaneous 251
238The rich development of historical studies in the 253
239future. Prophecy, which had hitherto been the 253
240from Condorcet’s dreams. So, too, Condorcet’s 255
241[admin]istration of things’: this Saint-Simonian 256
242pessimists begin. The poet Heine warned the French 257
243return to a pre-capitalist and pre-industrial 258
244emergence as a coherent doctrine may perhaps 259
245place, as the Frenchlumières taught, but 260
246Countries. German towns and principalities, both 261
247romantics, and, after them, of the Russian Slavophils 262
248derive from them is certainly unjust. Even the 263
249As for Marx and Engels, for them, I need hardly 264
250Revolution, it is fair to say, was genuinely 265
251[ob]structed the advance of the enlightenment 267
252this may indeed account for the reaction of wounded 268
253seem, to say the least, to weaken the orthodox Marxist 269
254In the face of this, faith in countervailing forces 270
255the validity of the laws and customs and ancient ways 271
256issues of the future could be decided on the basis of 272
257human beings as specifically human, that is, as 273
258powers, to insult them into awareness of the totalitarian 274
259is the very triumph of scientific rationalism everywhere 275
260‘interested error’ of the ruling class which 276
261[resist]ance. There is something of the same 277