The Square and the Tower

The Square and the Tower Plot Summary

Introduction

Throughout human history, power has flowed through two distinct organizational structures: hierarchies and networks. Hierarchies are the familiar pyramids of power we recognize in governments, corporations, and religious institutions. Networks, by contrast, are the often invisible webs of connection that link people through friendship, trade, shared beliefs, or common interests. The tension between these two forms of organization has shaped the course of civilization, from ancient empires to modern digital societies. The story of global power is one of constant oscillation between periods when hierarchical structures dominated and eras when networks flourished. When printing technology emerged in the 15th century, it empowered networks of religious reformers to challenge the Catholic Church. When radio and television appeared in the 20th century, they strengthened hierarchical states. Today, as digital networks connect billions of people worldwide, we are witnessing another profound shift in the balance between networks and hierarchies. Understanding this pattern helps us make sense of our past, navigate our present, and perhaps glimpse our future as we face challenges from terrorism to financial instability to the rise of populist movements.

Chapter 1: Early Networks: From Illuminati to Enlightenment (1700s-1800s)

The story of networks begins with a secret society that emerged in Bavaria just two months before America declared independence. The Illuminati, founded by Adam Weishaupt in 1776, aimed to spread Enlightenment ideals and "dispel the clouds of superstition and prejudice." Though small in number initially, the group grew to over 1,300 members within a few years, attracting intellectuals like Johann Wolfgang Goethe and influential nobles. Despite their lofty goals, the Bavarian government banned the order in 1784, effectively ending their existence by 1787. Yet the Illuminati's influence lived on in conspiracy theories. Writers like John Robison claimed they had caused the French Revolution and were plotting to overthrow all European governments. These theories persisted through centuries, with modern conspiracy theorists still claiming the Illuminati control world affairs. While such theories are largely nonsense, they reveal an important historical truth: networks have often challenged established hierarchies throughout history. The 18th century witnessed the rise of several influential networks beyond the Illuminati. The Freemasons spread across Europe and America, providing spaces where men of different social classes could mingle as equals. Their lodges played crucial roles in revolutionary movements, particularly in America where figures like Paul Revere and Joseph Warren used Masonic connections to organize resistance against British rule. The St. Andrew's Lodge in Boston became a revolutionary headquarters, with its members deeply involved in events like the Boston Tea Party. Simultaneously, intellectual networks were transforming European thought. The Republic of Letters connected philosophers across national boundaries through correspondence and travel. Voltaire exchanged letters with over 1,400 correspondents, while Benjamin Franklin traveled between Philadelphia, London, and Paris, absorbing and spreading new ideas. These networks created spaces where traditional authorities could be questioned and new concepts of liberty, equality, and governance could develop. The scientific revolution similarly depended on networks of scholars sharing discoveries through correspondence and newly formed institutions like the Royal Society. Scientists like Leonhard Euler moved between academic centers in Basel, St. Petersburg, and Berlin, while the Royal Society's secretary coordinated observations from correspondents across Europe and the colonies. This international collaboration accelerated the pace of discovery and challenged religious orthodoxies. By the late 18th century, these overlapping networks of Freemasons, philosophers, and scientists had created the conditions for political revolution. When the American colonists declared independence in 1776, they drew on network-based organization and Enlightenment ideals that had circulated through these channels for decades. The networks that began with secretive societies like the Illuminati had evolved into powerful forces capable of challenging and ultimately overthrowing established hierarchical orders.

Chapter 2: Revolutionary Networks: How Ideas Sparked Political Change

The late 18th century witnessed an unprecedented wave of political upheaval as revolutionary networks transformed ideas into action. The American Revolution of 1776 demonstrated how networks could effectively challenge established hierarchies. Paul Revere, often remembered for his midnight ride, was actually crucial because of his position as a connector between different revolutionary groups in Boston. As a member of multiple organizations including the St. Andrew's Masonic Lodge, the North End Caucus, and the Sons of Liberty, Revere bridged social divides between artisans and professionals, allowing revolutionary sentiment to spread rapidly across class lines. Freemasonry provided an organizational template for revolutionary movements. Though only a minority of America's founding fathers were confirmed Masons, key revolutionary leaders including George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Paul Revere were deeply involved in Masonic lodges. These organizations, with their emphasis on brotherhood and equality among members, created spaces where revolutionary ideas could be discussed away from hierarchical oversight. When Washington was inaugurated as president in 1789, he took the oath of office on a Masonic Bible, with the ceremony administered by another Mason, Robert Livingston. In France, revolutionary networks took a different form. While the American Revolution had been organized through established civic associations, the French Revolution began with more spontaneous collective action. The storming of the Bastille in July 1789 and the "Great Fear" that swept rural France that summer demonstrated how rapidly revolutionary sentiment could spread even without modern communications technology. Unlike in America, however, the French revolutionary networks quickly descended into violent factionalism, leading to the Terror of 1793-94 and eventually to Napoleon's dictatorship. The revolutionary era also saw the emergence of new economic networks. Merchants like Benedetto Cotrugli developed sophisticated trading relationships across the Mediterranean, while banking families like the Rothschilds created financial networks spanning Europe. By the early 19th century, Nathan Rothschild and his brothers had established banking houses in Frankfurt, London, Paris, Vienna, and Naples, creating an unprecedented concentration of financial power. Their private courier system allowed them to transmit information faster than government channels, giving them significant advantages in markets and politics alike. These revolutionary networks fundamentally challenged the hierarchical order that had dominated Europe for centuries. They demonstrated that power could flow horizontally through networks of citizens rather than vertically through traditional chains of command. However, as the French case showed, networks alone could not always maintain stability. The challenge for the post-revolutionary era would be finding a balance between the creative energy of networks and the order provided by hierarchies – a tension that continues to shape our world today.

Chapter 3: The Restoration of Hierarchical Order (1815-1870s)

After the tumult of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, Europe's leaders sought to restore hierarchical order. The Congress of Vienna in 1815 established what historian Leopold von Ranke called a "pentarchy" of five great powers – Austria, Britain, France, Prussia, and Russia – that would collectively manage European affairs. This new diplomatic hierarchy, championed by statesmen like Austria's Prince Metternich and Britain's Lord Castlereagh, aimed to prevent any single power from again threatening the continental balance as Napoleon had done. The restoration of monarchy was central to this new order. The Bourbon dynasty returned to France, while across Europe royal families reasserted their legitimacy. Most impressive was the rise of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, which through strategic marriages placed its members on thrones across Europe. Queen Victoria's marriage to Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha in 1840 was just one link in a family network that eventually included the rulers of Belgium, Portugal, Bulgaria, and through Victoria's descendants, the monarchs of Russia, Germany, Norway, Spain, and Romania. By the 1890s, royal family gatherings resembled international summits. Alongside this royal network, a new financial elite emerged. The Rothschild banking dynasty established houses in five European capitals, creating an unprecedented concentration of financial power. Their private courier system allowed them to transmit information faster than government channels, giving them significant influence over state affairs. As Alexandre Weill noted in 1841, "Rothschild had need of the states to become Rothschild, but now he no longer needs the state, but the state still has want of him." The Rothschilds exemplified how the post-1815 order was not simply a restoration of the ancien régime but a new synthesis of traditional authority and modern finance. The Industrial Revolution accelerated during this period, creating vast new concentrations of economic power. Factory owners and railroad magnates formed a new industrial elite, while workers increasingly organized into labor unions. Yet Britain, the center of industrialization, avoided the revolutionary upheavals that swept continental Europe in 1848. This was partly because the British elite proved adaptable, gradually accommodating reform movements like the campaign against slavery. When Parliament received petitions with almost 1.5 million signatures demanding slave emancipation in 1833, the political system responded by abolishing slavery throughout the empire. This period saw the emergence of modern imperialism, with European powers extending their control over vast territories in Africa and Asia. The British Empire, in particular, developed a distinctive approach to imperial governance, combining hierarchical authority with network-based administration. Rather than directly controlling colonial territories, Britain often ruled through existing local elites, creating what Frederick Lugard would later call "indirect rule." This system allowed Britain to control an empire of unprecedented size with remarkably few personnel – by 1900, fewer than 1,000 British civil servants administered India's population of over 300 million. By the 1870s, a new global order had emerged, combining traditional hierarchies with modern networks of finance, industry, and imperial administration. This system proved remarkably stable, producing what historians have called the "long peace" between the Congress of Vienna and the outbreak of World War I in 1914. Yet beneath this apparent stability, new networks were forming that would eventually challenge the restored hierarchical order.

Chapter 4: Imperial Networks: The Golden Age of Global Empires

The late nineteenth century marked the zenith of European imperial power, with Western empires controlling nearly 60 percent of the earth's territory, 57 percent of its population, and 74 percent of global economic output by 1900. The British Empire reached its greatest extent, encompassing one-quarter of the world's land surface and governing nearly 400 million people. Yet remarkably, this vast empire was administered by a tiny elite – fewer than 1,000 members of the Indian Civil Service governed the entire Indian subcontinent, while just over 1,200 colonial administrators managed a dozen African colonies with 43 million inhabitants. This imperial dominance was made possible by revolutionary advances in transportation and communication technologies. The steamship reduced the journey time from England to Cape Town from forty-two to nineteen days between the 1850s and 1890s, while the cost of shipping goods across oceans fell dramatically. Even more transformative was the telegraph, which by 1880 had laid nearly 100,000 miles of cable across the world's oceans, connecting Britain to its far-flung empire. Messages that once took months to deliver could now be transmitted in minutes, allowing London to maintain control over distant territories with unprecedented efficiency. The imperial networks were not solely government enterprises. Much of the infrastructure of empire was built and operated by private companies. The telegraph cables that formed the nervous system of the British Empire were largely owned by companies founded by the Scottish entrepreneur John Pender, whose Eastern Telegraph Company controlled one-third of the global telegraph system by the 1890s. Similarly, the rubber plantations of Malaya, which produced the gutta-percha essential for insulating undersea cables, were developed through a combination of private enterprise, scientific research at institutions like Kew Gardens, and colonial administration. Imperial expansion often encountered fierce resistance. In China, the Taiping Rebellion (1850-1865) – a strange hybrid of Christianity and Chinese traditions led by Hong Xiuquan, who believed himself to be Jesus Christ's younger brother – nearly overthrew the Qing dynasty and caused between 20 and 70 million deaths. The rebellion was eventually suppressed with British assistance, as imperial powers preferred to maintain the weakened Qing regime rather than risk the chaos of revolution. Similarly, in South Africa, Alfred Milner and his "Kindergarten" of Oxford-educated administrators worked to establish British dominance after the Boer War, though their vision of a British-dominated South Africa ultimately gave way to a union dominated by Afrikaner politicians. The imperial era also saw the emergence of global migration networks, with approximately 150 million people leaving Europe, China, and Russia between 1840 and 1940. However, these migration flows provoked nativist backlashes, exemplified by the anti-Chinese movement in California led by Denis Kearney, whose slogan "The Chinese Must Go!" helped inspire legislation that effectively ended Chinese immigration to the United States. This pattern of network expansion followed by hierarchical restriction would repeat itself throughout the imperial era. By the early twentieth century, the imperial powers had created a globally integrated world, connected by networks of trade, communication, and migration. Yet these same networks were creating the conditions for imperial decline, as ideas of nationalism and self-determination spread through the very channels the empires had established. The golden age of empires contained within it the seeds of its own destruction.

Chapter 5: Networks at War: Secret Societies and World Conflicts

The early twentieth century witnessed the collision of imperial hierarchies with increasingly powerful networks, culminating in the catastrophe of World War I. In the years before 1914, Europe's great powers had formed into two opposing alliance systems – the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy versus the Triple Entente of Britain, France, and Russia. These formal diplomatic arrangements were reinforced by royal family connections, with Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, and King George V of Britain all being first cousins as grandchildren of Queen Victoria. Yet these familial networks proved insufficient to prevent the descent into war. Beneath the surface of imperial stability, new networks of revolutionaries, nationalists, and anarchists were forming. In Britain, the Cambridge "Apostles" – an elite secret society at Cambridge University – evolved from a philosophical discussion group into a network with increasingly radical views. Under the influence of philosophers like G.E. Moore, members including John Maynard Keynes, Lytton Strachey, and E.M. Forster developed a worldview that rejected traditional morality and patriotism. As Forster would later write, "If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country." More directly threatening to imperial order were nationalist networks in Eastern Europe. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914 was carried out by members of the Black Hand, a Serbian nationalist network. This single act, performed by a small group of conspirators, triggered the chain of events that led to global war. The conflict that followed demonstrated both the power and vulnerability of networks in the industrial age. The elaborate railway networks that had facilitated European economic integration now enabled rapid military mobilization, while telegraph networks allowed unprecedented coordination of forces. The war also saw the emergence of new intelligence networks. In Britain, the cryptanalysts of Room 40 broke German codes, while networks of spies operated behind enemy lines. The Russian Revolution of 1917 revealed how effectively revolutionary networks could exploit wartime chaos to overthrow established hierarchies. Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks, organized as a disciplined revolutionary vanguard, seized power in Russia and established a new type of hierarchical state that combined traditional autocratic methods with modern techniques of surveillance and control. The aftermath of World War I saw attempts to create new international networks to prevent future conflicts. The League of Nations, championed by American President Woodrow Wilson, represented an effort to replace the old balance of power with a new system of collective security. Meanwhile, the Communist International (Comintern) established by the Bolsheviks aimed to spread revolution worldwide through networks of communist parties in different countries. The interwar period thus became a battleground between competing visions of world order: the liberal internationalism of Wilson, the revolutionary internationalism of Lenin, and the resurgent nationalism that would eventually find its most extreme expression in fascism. Each of these movements utilized networks to challenge existing hierarchies, but they differed fundamentally in their goals and methods. The stage was set for an even more devastating global conflict that would test whether hierarchical states or networked movements would shape the future world order.

Chapter 6: The Digital Revolution: From ARPANET to Global Connectivity

The seeds of our digital age were planted during the Cold War, when the United States Department of Defense created ARPANET in 1969 – a resilient computer network designed to survive nuclear attack by having no central hub. This revolutionary approach to information sharing, where data could travel through multiple pathways to reach its destination, established the fundamental architecture of what would become the internet. Unlike traditional hierarchical communications systems, this network was deliberately decentralized, with no single point of failure. The transformation from military experiment to global phenomenon accelerated in the 1980s and 1990s. Tim Berners-Lee's creation of the World Wide Web in 1989 made the internet accessible to non-specialists, while the development of user-friendly browsers like Mosaic and Netscape Navigator in the early 1990s opened digital networks to the general public. What had begun as a connection between a handful of research computers evolved into a global network connecting billions of devices. The internet's growth followed a pattern network theorists call "preferential attachment" – new nodes tended to connect to already well-connected hubs, creating a scale-free network with massive central nodes. Silicon Valley emerged as the epicenter of this digital revolution, producing companies that would fundamentally reshape global power structures. Firms like Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple created platforms that connected billions of users while accumulating unprecedented amounts of data and wealth. These tech giants operated differently from traditional hierarchical corporations, often embracing flatter organizational structures and network-based business models. Yet they paradoxically created new forms of centralized power, with a handful of companies controlling the digital infrastructure used by billions. The digital revolution transformed political movements and governance. The Arab Spring of 2010-2011 demonstrated how social media platforms could help coordinate protests and bypass state censorship, allowing revolutionary networks to challenge entrenched hierarchical regimes. Yet authoritarian states quickly adapted, developing sophisticated surveillance systems and censorship techniques. China's "Great Firewall" and Russia's increasingly controlled internet showed that hierarchical states could harness digital networks for their own purposes. Financial systems were similarly transformed. The 2008 global financial crisis revealed how digital networks had created new forms of systemic risk, as complex financial instruments spread risk throughout the global economy in ways that regulators struggled to understand or control. The subsequent development of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin represented attempts to create financial networks outside traditional hierarchical control, though their actual impact remained limited compared to established financial institutions. By the early 21st century, digital networks had penetrated virtually every aspect of human life, from personal relationships to global commerce and governance. The average person was connected to far more people than at any previous point in history, yet these connections were increasingly mediated through platforms controlled by a small number of corporations and monitored by state agencies. The digital revolution had not eliminated hierarchies but had transformed them, creating new power structures that combined network characteristics with centralized control in complex and sometimes contradictory ways.

Chapter 7: The Dialectic of Networks and Hierarchies Today

Today we live in a world shaped by the constant tension between networks and hierarchies. Social media platforms connect billions of users in horizontal networks while simultaneously concentrating unprecedented power in the hands of a few tech giants. Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms played crucial roles in movements from the Arab Spring to Black Lives Matter, enabling decentralized organizing outside traditional hierarchical structures. Yet these same companies exercise enormous control over public discourse, with algorithms determining what information reaches which users. The 2016 US presidential election revealed both the power and vulnerability of our networked world. Donald Trump's campaign leveraged social media to bypass traditional gatekeepers and speak directly to voters, while Russian intelligence agencies exploited these same networks to spread disinformation. As the US intelligence community concluded, "Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign" that used "a network of quasi-government trolls" to influence American voters. This episode demonstrated how state hierarchies could weaponize networks against democratic processes. Simultaneously, terrorist networks like ISIS have proven remarkably resilient against hierarchical state power. By organizing as distributed networks rather than traditional military hierarchies, these groups can survive the loss of leaders and territory. Their propaganda spreads through the same digital networks that connect legitimate businesses and ordinary citizens. Traditional military and intelligence hierarchies have been forced to adapt, developing network-centric approaches to counterterrorism that mirror the structures they target. The COVID-19 pandemic further illustrated the complex interplay between networks and hierarchies. The virus spread rapidly through global transportation networks, while scientific knowledge about it circulated through international research networks. Responses varied dramatically between countries, with some hierarchical states implementing effective containment measures while others faltered. Digital networks enabled remote work and education during lockdowns but also spread misinformation that undermined public health efforts. Financial systems continue to evolve in this tension between centralization and distribution. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies promise decentralized alternatives to traditional banking hierarchies, yet most financial power remains concentrated in a small number of institutions. The 2008 financial crisis demonstrated how networked finance could create systemic risks that traditional hierarchical regulations struggled to address. Looking toward the future, artificial intelligence presents perhaps the ultimate challenge to the network-hierarchy dialectic. AI systems are being developed by hierarchical corporations and states but operate through vast neural networks that process information in ways their creators cannot fully predict or control. As these systems become more powerful and autonomous, they may develop emergent properties that transcend both the networks and hierarchies that produced them. The fundamental lesson of this historical journey is that neither pure networks nor pure hierarchies can provide stable social organization. The most successful systems combine elements of both, allowing for the creativity and resilience of networks while maintaining the coordination and accountability of hierarchies. As we face unprecedented global challenges from climate change to technological disruption, finding this balance becomes not just an intellectual exercise but an existential necessity.

Summary

Throughout history, the interplay between networks and hierarchies has shaped the rise and fall of civilizations, empires, and social movements. Networks—with their distributed power, adaptability, and resilience—have repeatedly challenged rigid hierarchical structures, from the spread of early Christianity through Roman trade routes to the digital revolutions of our time. Yet hierarchies have demonstrated remarkable staying power through their ability to coordinate large-scale action, maintain stability, and evolve in response to networked challenges. Neither form represents an absolute advantage; rather, their relative effectiveness depends on specific historical contexts and technological capabilities. The digital age has dramatically accelerated this ancient tension, creating networks of unprecedented scale and complexity while simultaneously enabling new forms of hierarchical control through surveillance and platform monopolies. As we face global challenges from climate change to artificial intelligence governance, the most promising path forward lies not in choosing between networks and hierarchies but in developing hybrid organizational forms that combine the creativity and resilience of networks with the coordination capabilities of hierarchies. By understanding this fundamental dynamic of human organization, we can better navigate the power structures that shape our world and design more effective institutions for our collective future.

About Author

Loading...

Niall Ferguson

Niall Ferguson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, former Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University and current senior fellow at the Center for European Studies at Harvard University, a visiting professor at Tsinghua University, Beijing, and founder and managing director of advisory firm Greenmantle LLC. The author of 15 books, Ferguson is writing a life of Henry Kissinger, the first volume of which--Kissinger, 1923-1968: The Idealist--was published in 2015 to critical acclaim. The World's Banker: The History of the House of Rothschild won the Wadsworth Prize for Business History. Other titles include Civilization: The West and the Rest, The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die and High Financier: The Lives and Time of Siegmund Warburg. Ferguson's six-part PBS television series, "The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World," based on his best-seller, won an International Emmy for best documentary in 2009. Civilization was also made into a documentary series. Ferguson is a recipient of the Benjamin Franklin Award for Public Service as well as other honors. His most recent book is The Square and the Tower: Networks on Power from the Freemasons to Facebook (2018).(Source: Amazon)

Read more

Related Books by Niall Ferguson

Loading...

Empire

Niall Ferguson

How Britain Made the Modern World

★★★½☆3.9

Loading...

The Ascent of Money

Niall Ferguson

A Financial History of the World

★★★½☆3.9

Loading...

Civilization

Niall Ferguson

The Six Killer Apps of Western Power

★★★½☆3.9

Loading...

The House of Rothschild

Niall Ferguson

Money’s Prophets 1798–1848

★★★½☆3.9