Bernard Mandeville was one of the most controversial figures in the early 18th century,and his doctrine of the state of nature was also the most important source of Rousseau's Discourse on Inequality .Adam Smith noted it long before,but it has not got enough attention for a long time .Clarifying the connection between Mandeville and Rousseau's doctrines of the state of nature is very important,not only for grasping the essence of Rousseau's thought,but also for the appreciation of civil society in the 18th century . The 2nd volume of The Fable of the Bees was a mature answer to the question that how could human being such like“an extraordinary selfish and headstrong,as well as cunning animal” be the only sociable animal,which Mandeville had concerned with for years .As well as modern natural law tradition,Mandeville resorted to a state of nature to contemplate the origins of society,but what he concerned with was the history of civil society,rather than justification of ruling,and he provided with a completely historical dimension .In his state of nature,there was no so-called natural law,and the barbarism and ignorance of man in the state of nature also made it impossible for them to establish society by contract .Civil society was formed by evolution over a long period of time .However,we can't simply perceive this process as a spontaneous order . For Mandeville,the key to the history of civil society was the taming of human passions rather than only material progress .It was the advance of the art of government that located in the heart of this historical narrative . We can clearly find Rousseau's similarities with Mandeville in his Discourse on Inequality . For them both,man in the state of nature was ignorant savage :he had no reason,either knew nothing of good or evil .The only distinction between him and animals was his learning talent . Mandeville and also Rousseau's descriptions of the state of nature were not based on a true study of history,but deduced from their understandings of human nature . They both agreed that society was formed by evolution over a long period of time,but they still insisted on the distinction between nature and artifice,and considered society as a departure from human nature,or a distortion of it .For them,there was no natural law in the state of nature,and the essence of the society was the strong subduing the weak . However,Rousseau and Mandeville's views on human nature had fundamental differences . Rousseau denied that there was any self-liking in the state of nature,while it was formed in the society .Pity,which was refused by Mandeville to be recognized as a virtue,for Rousseau was the source of every virtue,and it limited self-love of man in the state of nature .As a result of their differences in the view of human nature,the state of nature which was considered by Mandeville as miserable and destitute,and urgently needed to be overcome,for Rousseau was an innocent Eden . The civilization praised by Mandeville as an art of taming man's savage nature,for Rousseau was a heavy shackle round man's neck .Mandeville,the most thorough defender of modern civilization,paved the way for Rousseau,the severest critic of modern civilization .