au voyage de
Bougainville was not seriously meant, but it illustrates the fact that
in certain moods he felt the fascination of Rousseau's Arcadia.

D'Holbach met all these theories by pointing out that human development,
from the "state of nature" to social life and the ideas and commodities
of civilisation, is itself natural, given the innate tendency of man to
improve his lot. To return to the simpler life of the forests--or to
any bygone stage--would be denaturer l'homme, it would be contrary to
nature; and if he could do so, it would only be to recommence the career
begun by his ancestors and pass again through the same successive phases
of history. [Footnote: Syst. soc. i. 16, p. 190.]

There was, indeed, one question which caused some embarrassment to
believers in Progress. The increase of wealth and luxury was evidently
a salient feature in modern progressive states; and it was clear that
there was an intimate connection between the growth of knowledge and the
growth of commerce and industrial arts, and that the natural progress of
these meant an ever-increasing accumulation of riches and the practice
of more refined luxury. The question, therefore, whether luxury is
injurious to the general happiness occupied the attention of the
philosophers. [Footnote: D'Holbach, ib. iii. 7; Diderot, art. Luxe in
the Encylopaedia; Helvetius, De l'esprit, i. 3.] If it is injurious,
does it not follow that the forces on which admittedly Progress depends
are leading in an undesirable direction? Should they be obstructed, or
is it wiser to let things follow their natural tendency (laisser aller
les choses suivant leur pente naturelle)? Voltaire accepted wealth with
all its consequences. D'Holbach proved to his satisfaction that luxury
always led to the ruin of nations. Diderot and Helvetius arrayed
the arguments which could be urged on both sides. Perhaps the most
reasonable contribution to the subject was an essay of Hume.

4.

It is obvious that Rousseau and all other theorists of Regress would be
definitely refuted if it could be proved by an historical investigation
that in no period in the past had man's lot been happier than in the
present. Such an inquiry was undertaken by the Chevalier de Chastellux.
His book On Public Felicity, or Considerations on the lot of Men in the
various Epochs of History, appeared in 1772 and had a wide circulation.
[Footnote: There was a new edition in 1776 with an important additional
chap