Europe from the Peace of Utregt. 
it was ai6pporttinity which seldom occurs 
of indkirig'@ present of a crown ; and.Louis 
adds, ‘ et de Passurer 4a France.’ Inthe 
next page are two other corrections in his 
own hand-writing. Upon the whole then 
we may conclude, that although these Me- 
moirs are, as M. Flassan observes, neither 
in the hand-writing nor in the style of Louis, 
they are nevertheless composed from notes 
of his dictation, and contain sentiments 
which he either suggested, or was willing to 
adopt as’ his own.” 
Thus the pretensions of le Grand 
Monirque to a place in the catalogue 
of royal authors, seems to be as well 
established as those of the present gene- 
ration of his i#lustrious descendants. 
The introduction to the work itself 
breathes no equivocal portion of the 
spirit of the philosophical historian. It 
commences by calling attention “ to the 
difference of the mode in which the 
characters of ancient and [of] modern 
nations have been formed.”— 
“© Ancient cities falling at once into poli 
tical society, and requiring forms of govern- 
ment to hold them together, were obliged 
to appoint some one person, or some body 
of persons, to frame regulations for the 
conduct of general affairs, and the mainte- 
nance of order. These early: legislators 
finding themselves thus called upon to 
prescribe the institutions of an infant state, 
extended their directions to every thing 
which might influence the well being of the 
commonwealth: manners, dress, food, a- 
musements; became an object of public 
eare for punishment or reward. The mem- 
bers of these communities thus became 
attached to the peculiar customs of their 
eity; and when attacked by a foreign 
enemy they defended themselves with the 
more vigour and perseverance, as conquest 
implied the loss not.only of liberty, but of 
all the habits of their lives, endeared to 
them by long prescription and legislative 
sanetion. Of the same nature are the 
institutions of those. countries where reli- 
gion and government walking hand in hand 
have: laid down rules for every part of life, 
for eating, drinking, washing, sleeping ; such 
as the Mahometan nations, the Hindus, 
and the Chinese. 
The people of modern Europe have been 
cast in a different mould. Consisting ori- 
ginally of the wild inhabitants of woods, 
the bond of society held them but loosely 
together, and they ranged over the forest 
as unfettered in their actions as the streams 
that ran‘ from their mountains, here break- 
ing intoa torrent, and there swelling to an 
inundation, They are described by one of 
the greatest historians of antiquity as fond 
of idleness, but hating peace ; eager for war 
wheresoever it was to be found, and engaging 
willingly in the quarrels of their neighbours : 
following as leaders those who displayed 
579 
the most. valour, «and choosing as. kings 
those* whoconld boast the most illustrious 
descent: meeting frequently to cousult on 
the interests of their. tribe: leaving the 
decision of minor concerns to their chiefs, 
and reserving the discussion of the greater 
for the deliberation of all: paying peculiar 
honour to their women, for whom they 
willingly risked their lives: regarding with 
superstitious reverence the admonitions of 
their priests; and worshipping their gods 
in groves beneath no other canopy but that 
of heaven, and with no other temples than 
those which nature had formed. _1t was 
one of the consequences of the slight tex- 
ture of the frame by which the German 
people were held together, that few attri- 
butes belonged to the supreme power.” 
Hence, also, the author considers as 
derived the fewness and simplicity of 
our ancient laws, the confinement of pu- 
nishments almost exclusively to “ trea- 
son(or rather treachery) and cowardice,” 
and the right of personal justice and re- 
venge; whence “ the law of honour and 
the age of chivalry.” — 
“ Much .of. this strange mixture of fero- 
cious cruelty with refined gallantry, is un- 
doubtedly to be attributed to the intercourse 
of the Christians with the Moors and the 
Arabs: in the wars of Spain and the Cru- 
sades were learnt those refinements with 
which an eastern imagination had adorned 
the exercise of brute force and animal cou- 
rage. But, be its origin what it might, the 
spirit of chivalry_ produced a system of 
manners totally distinct from the govern- 
ment, and forming as if were a separate 
code which the laws of the state had not - 
created and could not suppress. ‘The 
member ofan ancient state could hear him- 
self grossly abused by his fellow-citizen, 
without any obligation. to retaliate, other- 
wise than by words: the noble or knight, 
of Germany or France was compelled either 
to draw his sword against his accuser, or to 
lose his character in society. No.form of. 
law, no species of tribunal could dispense 
with the necessity of revenge: and from 
the Bay of Naples to the Mountains of In-, 
verness, he who has been wronged ty word. 
or deed, thought himself bound to seek 
satisfaction in the blood of his adversary. 
In Italy and in Scotland, the death of the 
aggressor procured by any means was con- 
sidered a lawful atonement; and so far 
was this principle extended, that not many 
years have elapsed sincea judge was slain at 
Edinburgh by the party against whom he 
had pronounced a legal decision. In other 
parts of Europe the practice of single com- 
bat was usual, honourable, nay almost in- 
dispensable ; and there can be no better 
proof 
ed . 
* Surely his Lordship should have added, “ the 
wisest and ablest of those who,” &c: for ‘ illus- 
trious birth” was not alone a title to election. 
4E2 
