Tradition 3
individuals through their fellowship as members of society.
The culture of the individual is derived. We say, for ex-
ample, that a person is a “Victorian” or a “Southerner” ; and
we mean that his bearing, his manners, his outlook are like
those which were prevalent in the Victorian era, or in the
Southern States ; not fully reproduced, of course, in any one
person, but frequently and at critical periods breaking
through the individual shell; suggestive catches, as it were,
of the dominant tones of his contemporaries.
From this it is evident that culture is not just another word
for civilization. The dictionary, indeed, defines a “civil-
ized” person in contrast to a “barbarian” as “refined or
enlightened” ; but if we only had some way of indicating
by outward and visible sign the inward grace of refinement
and enlightenment, so that all men could detect it, we should
often be saved shocking disclosures. It is said in the Life
of Lord Cromer1 that he “entertained kindly feelings” for
one of the Khedives of Egypt, Twefik Pasha, who “in com-
parison with his infamous predecessor was a satisfactory
ruler; neither a murderer, a Spendthriftnor a thief—negative
qualities which, judged by the moral standards of the
society in which he lived, might be said to rise to the level
of positive virtues.” This Khedive could hardly be called
“enlightened” or “refined”; but Cromer would not have
banished him from the pale of civilization as a sheer barba-
rian. Nor do you need to search our cities with a lamp to
discover men and women whom you would at great risk
call uncivilized, but who would at once prove to you by utter-
ance and behavior that they were neither refined nor en-
lightened. The education of an individual is not to be
estimated in terms of the house in which he lives, the motor
he drives, nor even of the rare pictures that hang upon his
1 By the Marquess of Zetland, 183.