which is itself only an accident of nature—­is mere caprice like the former.  That one is therefore only a despot, not a free man.  The consciousness of freedom first arose among the Greeks, and therefore they were free; but they, and the Romans likewise, knew only that some are free, not man as such.  Even Plato and Aristotle did not know this.  The Greeks, therefore, had slaves, and their whole life and the maintenance of their splendid liberty was implicated with the institution of slavery—­a fact, moreover, which made that liberty, on the one hand, only an accidental, transient and limited growth, and on the other, a rigorous thraldom of our common nature—­of the Human.  The Germanic nations, under the influence of Christianity, were the first to attain the consciousness that man is free; that it is the freedom of Spirit which constitutes its essence.  This consciousness arose first in religion, the inmost region of Spirit; but to introduce the principle into the various relations of the actual world involves a more extensive problem than its simple implantation—­a problem whose solution and application require a severe and lengthened process of culture.  In proof of this we may note that slavery did not cease immediately on the reception of Christianity.  Still less did liberty predominate in States; or governments and constitutions adopt a rational organization, or recognize freedom as their basis.  That application of the principle to political relations, the thorough molding and interpenetration of the constitution of society by it, is a process identical with history itself.  I have already directed attention to the distinction here involved, between a principle as such and its application—­that is, its introduction and fulfilment in the actual phenomena of Spirit and life.  This is a point of fundamental importance in our science, and one which must be constantly respected as essential.  And in the same way as this distinction has attracted attention in view of the Christian principle of self-consciousness—­freedom, it also shows itself as an essential one in view of the principle of freedom generally.  The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom—­progress whose development, according to the necessity of its nature, it is our business to investigate.

The general statement given above of the various grades in the consciousness of freedom-which we applied in the first instance to the fact that the Eastern nations knew only that one is free, the Greek and Roman world only that some are free, while we know that all men absolutely (man as man) are free—­supplies us with the natural division of universal history, and suggests the mode of its discussion.  This is remarked, however, only incidentally and anticipatively; some other ideas must be first explained.