The Spirit of The Laws: What's Inside

The Spirit of the
Laws
Study Guide by Course Hero
also makes a strong historical case for the doctrine of

What's Inside separation of powers, an essential part of many modern
democratic constitutions and reflects on such varied issues as
slavery and the church-state relationship. Though sometimes
j Book Basics ................................................................................................. 1 prone to the biases of his era, Montesquieu amply illustrates
his claims about the source and nature of political power with
a Main Ideas .................................................................................................... 1
allusions to ancient, medieval, and modern history. For
d In Context .................................................................................................... 3 students of American politics, Montesquieu's profound
influence on the Founding Fathers provides an additional
a Author Biography ..................................................................................... 5 reason to study The Spirit of the Laws.
h Key Figures ................................................................................................. 6 ABOUT THE TITLE

In The Spirit of the Laws, Montesquieu surveys the history of
k Plot Summary ............................................................................................. 8
legal systems throughout Europe and Asia in order to identify
the underlying "spirit" governing these countries. Each system
c Part Summaries ........................................................................................ 11
of government, he proposes, has its own fundamental
g Quotes ........................................................................................................ 27 principles, which must be kept in mind if the country is to be
stable and prosperous.
m Glossary ..................................................................................................... 30
a Main Ideas
j Book Basics
AUTHOR
Montesquieu
Three Systems of Government
YEAR PUBLISHED Montesquieu's (1689–1755) main project in The Spirit of the
1748 Laws is to weigh the benefits and drawbacks, along with the
special risks and opportunities, inherent in the world's many
GENRE systems of government. To accomplish this, he begins by
History, Philosophy dividing governments into three major categories: republic,
monarchy, and despotism. He does not pretend that these
AT A GLANCE
three models adequately describe every possible system of
Penned during the peak of the French Enlightenment (1700s, a
government; instead, he uses them as points of reference.
period where reason governed change in the areas of religion
Moreover, Montesquieu is aware of—and interested in—the
and politics), The Spirit of the Laws is one of the foundational
ways in which a nation transitions from one system to another.
works of modern Western political thought. Montesquieu
systematically distinguishes among different types of The term republic, as Montesquieu uses it, means any system
government and describes the laws appropriate to each. He in which the people—or a significant fraction of the
The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Main Ideas 2
people—ultimately hold political power. Republics are further French and English was helped greatly by Montesquieu's use
divided into democracies, where the common people of it throughout The Spirit of the Laws.
collectively enjoy sovereignty, and aristocracies, where a select
few share power. Although he notes an example of direct
democracy in ancient Athens, he is more interested in Separation of Powers
representative democracies (the usual modern meaning of
democracy) in which elected officials represent their The Spirit of the Laws, though wide-ranging in the times and
constituents. The inclusion of aristocracies as a type of places it surveys, is neither neutral nor unbiased. Rather,
republic is a little unusual by present-day standards, since the Montesquieu uses his book's extensive tour of legal history to
word "aristocracy" now tends to be associated with hereditary support some specific ideas about how governments should
nobility common in a monarchy. Montesquieu, is less interested be run to benefit both their leaders and their citizens. One key
in whether a country has a king than in who really holds the principle is the separation of powers: the idea that different
reins of power. A nation with a figurehead monarch and a governmental responsibilities should be placed in the hands of
politically dominant nobility would be, by his reckoning, a type different people. Governments with an effective separation of
of republic. powers, he suggests, are resilient; governments that give too
free a rein to a single individual or group will quickly devolve
In both of the remaining systems, an individual serves as the
into tyranny.
head of government. In a monarchy this individual is subject to
the laws of the land. Montesquieu's prime example of such a At various points in the text Montesquieu gives slightly
system is England—and not his native France, as might be different enumerations of these powers and draws slightly
expected. In England, as in France, the monarch had once held different lines between them. Typically, however, he speaks of
near-absolute power, but after the English Civil War (1642–51, three powers: the judiciary, the executive, and the legislative.
fought between supporters of and opposition to the These correspond to the three branches of government in the
monarchy), Parliament was able to impose substantial United States (founded some three decades after The Spirit of
limitations on the monarch's power. Thus, in a sense, the the Laws was published) and in other modern representative
England of Montesquieu's day is more of a "hybrid" democracies. The resemblance is hardly a coincidence: the
government with both a legislative body (Parliament) and a framers of many modern democratic constitutions were
monarch. Again, the boundaries are not intended to be inspired, directly or indirectly, by Montesquieu.
absolute.
Montesquieu has no trouble coming up with instances in which
Despotic governments, in Montesquieu's view, are different poorly conceived separation of powers led to the ruin of a
from monarchies, in that the ruler is not subject to laws. Rather, government. "When legislative power is united with executive
his word is the law, and when he changes his mind about an power," he flatly declares in Book 11, "there is no liberty."
issue, the law changes too. As his main examples, Montesquieu Likewise, he says, several ancient Greek city-states created
names Japan, China at various points in its history, and the tyrants by giving their rulers both executive and judiciary
Ottoman Empire. (He typically refers to the latter simply as power while allocating only legislative power to the people.
"Turkey.") Montesquieu also points to some despotic qualities When there is no attempt to separate governmental powers,
in the rule of Louis XIV of France (1638–1715), the famous "Sun the situation is even worse: in a sense Montesquieu's quarrel
King" who embodied the principle of absolute monarchy. What with despotism—above and beyond mere moral disgust—is its
makes Louis XIV a despot, not a monarch in Montesquieu's lack of such separation of powers. The despot is, at the end of
sense, is his extreme consolidation of power and his lack of the day, the paramount maker, enforcer, and interpreter of the
subjection to his own laws. realm's laws. There can be no effective system of "checks and
balances" in such a regime.
The word despot comes from an ancient Greek term meaning,
literally, "an absolute ruler." By Montesquieu's time, however,
the word had acquired a strong negative connotation—it meant
not just an absolute ruler, but one who ruled in a cruel and
arbitrary manner. The popularization of the word in both
Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide In Context 3
not mean they were carried out in the same way or served the
History Repeats Itself same administrative function.
An even more fundamental idea, one to which Montesquieu
d In Context
calls little explicit attention, is that history repeats itself. In
other words Montesquieu embraces the Enlightenment-era
ideal of learning as much as one can from history, not just as a
source of personal edification, but in order to avoid repeating
its mistakes. This belief guides Montesquieu in his selection of Law and Government in
examples to illustrate his points: often, Montesquieu will
juxtapose events from two regimes separated by hundreds or Ancient Rome
even thousands of years. He believes that where human
institutions are similar, history will follow the same broad The Spirit of the Laws is rich in allusions to the history of
pattern. various countries, both ancient and modern. No part of the
world gives Montesquieu more material for his ideas than
Much of The Spirit of the Laws is devoted to identifying the
Rome, which at different times was a monarchy, a republic, and
factors which drive or predict such repetition. In Part 4, Book
an empire.
22, for instance, Montesquieu asks why the Romans' attempts
to prevent usury (act of loaning money at a high rate of According to myth, Rome was founded as a kingdom by
interest) backfired. This question fascinates him because brothers Romulus and Remus in the mid-8th century BCE.
modern rulers, in their own quest to set financial policy, have Supposedly, Romulus killed his twin brother Remus and
sometimes placed similar restrictions on excessive interest. To became the first king of the city-state they had founded
understand why the Roman public ultimately rejected such together. Seven kings are said to have ruled, with the reign of
constraints is to understand the forces that will doom a similar the last, Tarquin, ending in 509 BCE. The Kingdom of Rome, to
program in the present. A key assumption here is that human the extent that descriptions of this state are history rather than
nature has changed little in the 2,000 years since the Roman legend, is generally described by modern historians as an
Republic. Then as now, people are fond of a quick fix, and absolute or near-absolute monarchy. Montesquieu, if he shared
politicians are happy to promise one to them. Then as now, this view, would have called it a despotic state. In The Spirit of
borrowers and lenders will find a way to do business, no matter the Laws, however, Montesquieu gives great emphasis to the
what the law says. early Roman Senate—which was, in fact, not nearly as powerful
as its successor in the republican and imperial eras. Because
The quest for historical parallels is one reason for
he treats the senate and its laws as a vital part of Rome's regal
Montesquieu's extensive reliance on ancient Rome as a source
era, he is inclined to see the Kingdom of Rome as a true
of examples. It also helps to explain his meticulous picking-
monarchy.
over of Roman, Frankish, and French legal customs at the very
end of The Spirit of the Law. However, Montesquieu does not The next major phase of Roman history was the republic,
believe—in fact, mocks other historians for believing—that the inaugurated in 509 BCE. Many of the laws to which
same broad system of government translates to the same Montesquieu refers are of republican vintage, but the most
specific legal practices. In the next-to-last book of his treatise, prominent is the Law of the Twelve Tables (451–450 BCE),
Montesquieu warns: "To carry back to distant centuries the established early in the republic's history. This document,
ideas of the century in which one lives is of all sources of error named for the 12 bronze tablets on which the laws were
the most fertile." In other words history can furnish an attentive engraved, was the first written legal code in Roman history.
reader with general patterns and with warning signs about the The exact nature of republican Roman government shifted
perennial threats faced by a regime—whether republican, somewhat over the centuries, but a pair of elected consuls
monarchical, or despotic. Assuming equivalence on a finer ruled except during military emergencies, when a dictator was
scale, however, is very foolish, at least to Montesquieu's way of chosen. The consuls were chosen from among the patricians,
thinking. The ancient Roman census and the medieval Frankish or upper class, whose ranks also included the senators—now
"census," for instance, may have the same name, but that does more influential than they ever were in the regal era. The

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide In Context 4
commoners, called plebeians, were effectively barred from Montesquieu is concerned with a later period, running roughly
government except through a small number of representatives, from the time of Louis IX (1214–70) to his own era. Louis was
called tribunes. In Montesquieu's scheme of government one of the Capetians, the dynasty that succeeded the
classifications the Roman Republic would be labeled an Carolingians in 987. Though he had many claims to fame—he
aristocracy. was canonized a saint in 1297—Montesquieu is mainly
interested in Louis's attempts to reform the legal code. Several
After the Civil War of 49–30 BCE, Rome formally became an aspects of the modern French system of justice were
empire as Julius Caesar's nephew Octavian (regnal name: introduced by Louis IX, such as the presumption of innocence
Augustus) took power in 27 BCE. By this point Rome had a ("innocent until proven guilty") in criminal defendants.
vast territorial extent, supported by an equally vast military and Montesquieu is critical, however, of Louis's willingness to
administrative complex. During the early imperial period, called personally judge court cases—a prerogative he says should
the principate, Roman emperors were nominally the principles, never be exercised by a monarch.
or "first citizens," of a continuing republic—though in practical
terms Rome was now a monarchy. The pretense was dropped After Louis IX the Capetians continued to rule until 1328. At
in the latter centuries of the Empire, known as the dominate, that point, a junior or "cadet" branch of the Capetian dynasty
because the emperor was the acknowledged dominus, or took over and ruled as the House of Valois (1328–1589). Their
master. history, again, is of interest to Montesquieu largely because it
coincides with the history of France's legal system. The
The fall of the Western Roman Empire, customarily dated to accession of the Valois monarchs depended on ancient Salic
the overthrow of Emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476 CE, left law—the law of the Frankish tribe which had first come to
much of Western Europe prone to conquest (or reconquest) by power under Clovis over 800 years before. In particular the
various Germanic tribes. The laws and customs of these tribes, first Valois monarch, Philip VI (1293–1350), based his claim on
mingled with those of the now-defunct empire, formed the the Salic principle that a woman could not succeed to the
basis for the legal codes of medieval France and its neighbors. throne. This belief barred Philip's main competitor (Edward III
Tracing this latter development is Montesquieu's express of England) from the throne and—more interestingly for
purpose in Part 6 of The Spirit of the Laws. In the East, Montesquieu—left historians and jurists with a centuries-long
meanwhile, imperial rule continued in the form of the Byzantine debate about the ongoing applicability of Salic law in France.
Empire, which lasted until 1453. Although hugely important to Readers of Shakespeare's histories may remember this same
European history, the Byzantine Empire occupies relatively law becoming a plot point in Henry V, where the English king
little space in Montesquieu's work, perhaps because its makes his own claim to the French throne.
territories never included France.
The Valois branch died out in 1589, and another junior branch,
the House of Bourbon, took over. This branch continued to rule
France in Montesquieu's Time right up to the French Revolution (1787–99, rebellion against
the monarchy and feudalism), some three decades after
France, from the Middle Ages to the 18th century, is Montesquieu's death. The most famous Bourbon monarch,
Montesquieu's other major frame of reference in The Spirit of perhaps the most famous French monarch of them all, is Louis
the Laws. In Part 6 of his treatise Montesquieu describes the XIV (1638–1715), who reigned from 1643 to 1715. Known as the
early medieval history of France, in which three successive Sun King, Louis was a strong believer in absolute monarchy
dynasties or "races" of kings progressively unified the region and, like the star of his own solar system, set about pulling all
into something like its modern form. Under Clovis I (c. 466–511) of the French government's institutions into his "orbit."
and his heirs, called the Merovingians, the Franks went from Montesquieu admires the cultural and political successes of
being a tribe with only local influence to exerting dominion over Louis XIV's reign but, because of his pursuit of absolute power,
most of France (then called Francia). The Merovingians were in cannot avoid seeing elements of despotism in the Sun King's
turn succeeded by the Carolingians, a dynasty whose most reign. Louis XV (1710–74), the great-grandson of Louis XIV, was
famous member is Charlemagne (c. 747–814). the sitting monarch throughout Montesquieu's adult life. The
Spirit of the Laws wisely reserves judgment, at least overtly,
In the main body of the work (Parts 1–5), however, about the wisdom or foolishness of Louis XV's style of

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Author Biography 5
leadership. and sets boundaries on the activities of each.
In the subsequent debate over the Constitution's ratification,
Reactions to The Spirit of the both the Federalists (in favor of ratification) and the Anti-
Federalists (who opposed it) quoted extensively from
Laws Montesquieu's treatise. The former argued that the

Constitution as written followed Montesquieu's prescriptions
for a stable government. Their opponents, who eventually won
The immediate critical reaction to The Spirit of the Laws was
several concessions via the Bill of Rights, argued that more
largely favorable, both domestically and abroad. Within France
work was needed to secure the "moderate" government of
the editors of the Encyclopédie—a work sometimes considered
which Montesquieu spoke so highly. Taking stock of these
to be the definitive symbol of Enlightenment ideals—soon
influences, Washington Post writer Hank Burchard has
asked Montesquieu to contribute articles on political topics.
pronounced Montesquieu a "neglected 'godfather' of the [U.S.]
(Encyclopedia writing was then a considerably higher-profile
constitution."
activity than it is today.) He declined this offer, but he later
agreed to write an Encyclopédie article on taste and aesthetics
instead. More enduringly, Montesquieu is sometimes credited
with helping to inaugurate the French Revolution. Even so, the a Author Biography
revolution's architects largely rejected Montesquieu's attempts
to distinguish between monarchy and despotism. In their eyes
monarchy by its very nature was never far removed from
tyranny.
Early Years
The earliest and most enthusiastic foreign proponents of Montesquieu was born Charles-Louis de Secondat on January
Montesquieu's treatise were the leaders of the Scottish 18, 1689 at Château La Brède, a winemaking estate in the
Enlightenment, including philosopher David Hume (1711–76), French region known then as Aquitaine. His parents, both
historian Adam Ferguson (1723–1816), and political economist members of the nobility, were Jacques de Secondat and
Adam Smith (1723–90). Within the Church, meanwhile, some Marie-Françoise de Pesnel. The maternal family was the
felt that Montesquieu had gone too far in criticizing the political wealthier by far and held, among other titles, the barony of La
role of clergy. Pope Benedict XIV (r. 1740–58), famed for his Brède. When his mother died in 1696, Charles-Louis became
scholarship and patronage of the sciences, actually enjoyed baron, though his father continued to exert practical control
the work, but many of his cardinals did not share his tolerant over La Brède because of his son's extreme youth.
attitude. The Spirit of the Laws was placed on the Index
After a few years of private tutoring and local grammar school,
Librorum Prohibitorum ("List of Prohibited Books") in 1751.
the young Montesquieu enrolled at the Collège de Juilly, a
Works on this list were judged to be morally corrupting, and
prestigious secondary school run by the fathers of the French
Catholics were barred by canon law (made by the church) from
Oratory (congregation of priests). He completed his education
reading them.
at the University of Bordeaux (1705–08), where he studied law.
The Spirit of the Laws made its most lasting contribution in the In 1713 Montesquieu inherited the remainder of the family lands
founding of modern democracies. Several of the Founding from his father, and in 1715, he married the affluent Jeanne de
Fathers of the United States, to give one prominent example, Lartigue, a shrewd businesswoman often charged with
were avid adherents of Montesquieu's political theory. In managing the La Brède estate. The title by which he is now
particular, they were familiar with his arguments for the best known, the barony of Montesquieu, was passed to him in
separation of powers into multiple autonomous branches of 1716 when his uncle Jean-Baptiste died. It was at this time that
government. They were also knowledgeable about his he attained his full title, Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de
warnings regarding the consequences of neglecting such a La Brède et de Montesquieu.
separation. James Madison (1751–1836), and others took this
advice to heart in drafting the Constitution, which expressly
distinguishes an executive, a legislative, and a judiciary branch

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Key Figures 6
read extensively as preparation for his planned masterpiece,

Parliamentary Career and he traveled frequently between Paris and La Brède. At the
latter Montesquieu took an active and ongoing interest in the
Along with the barony, Montesquieu inherited a post as the cultivation of his vineyards, which remained a major source of
deputy president (président à mortier) of the Parlement de his wealth.
Bordeaux, where he had served as a judge since 1714. The
French parlements were not legislative bodies like today's Montesquieu's greatest work, The Spirit of the Laws, was
British Parliament but regional appellate courts similar in some published relatively late in life, in 1748. The reaction to this new
respects to the modern United States circuit courts. treatise was immediate and enthusiastic, though not without
Montesquieu had long been the heir apparent to his uncle's controversy. The Vatican placed the work on the Index
office, and he took on his earlier legal studies with this Librorum Prohibitorum, the Church's famous list of forbidden
responsibility in mind. books. Despite this placement, and despite criticism from
various other quarters, Montesquieu was secure in his fame
After his accession to the presidency, however, Montesquieu and confident in the lasting value of his achievement. By the
was given only limited judicial duties because he was much time of his death on February 10, 1755, he was widely
younger than the court's official minimum age of 40. He spent acknowledged as one of the leading figures in the ongoing
most of his time adjudicating criminal cases but achieved wider European Enlightenment, the intellectual movement of the 17th
renown in 1725 when he had the opportunity to deliver the and 18th centuries that celebrated human reason as the
parlement's annual opening address. There, he critiqued some highest good.
major flaws in French judicial practice and proposed remedies
to both his fellow judges and the lawyers who argued before
h Key Figures
them. Some of these criticisms are repeated, albeit briefly, in
The Spirit of the Laws.
Literary Accomplishments Montesquieu

In his limited time away from the courts, Montesquieu read Montesquieu is the author of The Spirit of the Laws and also its
copiously in law and history and also studied natural sciences strong-voiced narrator. Born to a noble French family, he was
at the Academy of Bordeaux. He published the Persian well-educated and involved in political and civic life from a
Letters—the first and shorter of his two major works—in 1721, young age. His experience of the French judicial system gave
satirizing French culture from the perspective of fictionalized him the context from which to begin writing. His literary
Persian visitors. The work was immensely popular, and achievements, especially in The Spirit of the Laws, made him a
Montesquieu, now a literary celebrity, moved to Paris. The leading figure of the Enlightenment and inspiration for
French royal court gradually became Montesquieu's new social democratic governments to come.
and intellectual home, and he sold his office as président in
1726. Less than two years later, he was elected to the
Académie Française—the greatest literary honor available to a
French writer of Montesquieu's time. A period of travel
throughout Europe followed, culminating in an extended stay in
England.
In the 1730s Montesquieu wrote much but published little. He

printed a short work on the theory of a universal monarchy
extending throughout Europe (Reflections on Universal
Monarchy, 1734) and in the same year a volume on the rise and
fall of Roman civilization (Considerations on the Causes of the
Greatness of the Romans and Their Decline). He continued to

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Key Figures 7
Full Key Figure List Childeric III (d. 755) was the last of the
Merovingian kings of France. His reign
Childeric III
ended in 751, when he was
sequestered in a monastery.
Key Figure Description
Clovis I (c. 466–511) was the founder

Montesquieu (1689–1755)—in full,
of the Merovingian dynasty. He was
Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de
Clovis I the first king of Gaul (modern-day
Montesquieu La Brède et de Montesquieu—was a
France) after the fall of Rome, ruling
French political philosopher and the
from 481 until his death.
author of The Spirit of the Laws.
Elizabeth I (1533–1603) was the queen

Alexander the Great (356–23 BCE)
of England from 1558 until her death.
Alexander the was king of Macedonia from 336 BCE
Elizabeth I During her reign England asserted
Great until his death. He was famously
itself as a major European political and
lenient with the people he conquered.
cultural power.
Augustus (63 BCE–14 CE), also known

Scottish philosopher David Hume
as Augustus Caesar, was the first
(1711–76) was a leader of the Scottish
emperor of Rome after the Roman David Hume
Augustus Enlightenment. He praised The Spirit
Republic was dissolved. He
of the Laws.
encouraged Romans to marry and
have children.
Julia (39 BCE–14 CE) was the
Julia
daughter and only child of Augustus.
Benedict XIV (1675–1758) was pope
from 1740 until his death; his reign was
Benedict XIV marked by support of the sciences John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946)
and political moderation. He is said to John Maynard
was a British economist. He praised
have enjoyed The Spirit of the Laws. Keynes
Montesquieu for his economic insight.
Charles Bonnet (1720–93) was a Louis I (778–840), whom Montesquieu

Charles Swiss philosopher and scientist who calls Louis the Pious, was Holy Roman
Bonnet was impressed by The Spirit of the Louis I
emperor after his father Charlemagne.
Laws. He ruled from 814 until his death.
Hugh Capet (938–96) was the king of Louis IX of France, also called Saint
France from 987 until his death. He is Louis (1214–70), was the most popular
Hugh Capet the founder of the Capetian dynasty, Louis IX
of the Capetian monarchs and the king
which reached its height during the of France from 1226 until his death.
reign of Louis IX.
Louis XIV, also called the Sun King

Catherine I (1684–1727), also called (1638–1715), was the most famous
Catherine the Great, was the second Louis XIV Bourbon monarch. He brought the
Catherine I wife of Peter I (the Great) and, after French monarchy to its pinnacle of
his death, empress of Russia from prestige and decadence.
1725 to 1727.
Louis XV (1710–74) was the great-

Charlemagne (c. 747–814) was king of grandson of Louis XIV and ruled as the
the Lombards and the first Holy Louis XV king of France from 1715 until his
Roman emperor. He is the most death. He was an ineffectual monarch
Charlemagne
famous member of the Carolingian who left France ripe for revolution.
dynasty, ruling from around 768 until
his death.

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Plot Summary 8
James Madison (1751–1836) was the Adam Smith (1723–90) was a Scottish
fourth president of the United States philosopher and economist. He was an
Adam Smith
(1809–17), one of the Founding enthusiastic proponent of The Spirit of
James Fathers, and one of the authors of the the Laws.
Madison Federalist Papers. He advocated for
separation of powers in government, a
principle he learned from The Spirit of Tarquin is the last of the seven kings
the Laws. of Rome. He ruled from 534 to 509
Tarquin
BCE. Some scholars doubt his
historicity.
Charles Martel (c. 688–741) was a
Frankish ruler who united the Frankish
Charles Martel kingdoms and stemmed the Muslim
invasion through Spain. His son was
Pippin III. k Plot Summary
Merovech (5th century) was the In early French and English editions The Spirit of the Laws was
grandfather of Clovis I. From his name
Merovech often divided into two volumes. The 1989 Cambridge edition,
derives Merovingian, the name of his
dynasty. used in this guide, divides the work instead into six parts. The
books within each part correspond to what a modern reader
Napoleon I (1769–1821) was emperor might think of as chapters; the chapters within each book vary
of France. He led France to territorial greatly in length but are sometimes less than half a page long.
Napoleon I
expansion and internal reforms after
the French Revolution (1787–99).
Philip VI (1293–1350) was the first

member of the Valois dynasty to rule
Part 1
Philip VI France. He acceded to the throne by
invoking the Salic principle barring The Spirit of the Laws begins with eight relatively fast-moving
women from being monarchs. books in which Montesquieu (1689–1755) establishes a
framework for thinking about law and government. He first
Pippin II (d. 714), also called Pippin of offers some fundamental definitions (Book 1) and then divides
Herstal, was the first Carolingian
the world's governments into three types: republican,
"mayor of the palace," the title given to
Pippin II monarchical, and despotic (Book 2). After sketching out the
Frankish rulers before there were
kings of the united Franks. Charles basic legal structure of each regime type, he attempts to
Martel was his illegitimate son.
describe the "principle" of each—the "spring" that makes it tick
(Book 3). Republics, he says, are driven by virtue; monarchies
Pippin III (c. 714–68), also called Pippin
by honor; despotic states by fear.
the Short, was king of the Franks from
Pippin III 751 until his death. He was the father
of Charlemagne and the first These different types of motivation have important
Carolingian king. consequences for how citizens are to be educated (Book 4)
and for what laws are suitable in general (Book 5). The court
Remus Remus is the twin brother of Romulus. systems and types of penalties must also be accommodated to
the type of government (Book 6), as must the laws concerning
Romulus is the mythical founder of luxury goods and status symbols (Book 7). When a
Rome in the mid-8th century BCE. He government's principles become corrupted, Montesquieu
Romulus
was the twin brother of Remus, whom
observes, the regime itself is in danger (Book 8).
he murdered.

these nations, from ancient Greece to modern Spain, have

Part 2 adapted themselves to the different "revolutions" in commerce,
meaning primarily the different technologies that have
The next two books deal with the rights and responsibilities of facilitated global trade. He then narrows his focus to issues of
a nation in defending itself (Book 9) and in conquering or monetary policy and lending (Book 22), cautioning against
invading another (Book 10). A conquering nation has the right, excessively restrictive or interventionist laws in this area. A
Montesquieu emphasizes, to cause a regime change, but it chapter on population (Book 23) follows, in which Montesquieu
does not have the right to kill off the inhabitants of a surveys the different policies used to control overpopulation or
conquered territory. Instead, those who succeed in wars of encourage population growth. The chapter closes with a
conquest have the opportunity, if not the obligation, to improve somewhat harsh remark about the societal role of poorhouses.
conditions for the conquered. Two books on the notion of
political liberty (Books 11 and 12) follow. The former treats the
subject from the point of view of a nation's constitution, while
the latter does so from the perspective of the individual citizen.
Part 5
In his single book devoted to taxes (Book 13), Montesquieu
The next three books serve both to introduce a new topic and
proposes a sort of sliding scale: the freer a country's
to summarize Montesquieu's overall model of law in society.
inhabitants are, the more willingly they will submit to heavy
Book 24 describes the relationship that law ought to have with
taxation as the "price" of that liberty.
the religion already established in a country: Christianity in
Western Europe, for example, or Islam in the Middle East and
North Africa. Here Montesquieu also remarks on the
Part 3 foolishness of trying to regulate morals by civil law when
religion will do the job more elegantly. In Book 25 Montesquieu
To Montesquieu a country's climate and terrain profoundly turns his attention to the closely related topic of religion and
influence almost every aspect of its political and economic national policy. It is usually counterproductive, he says, to try
situation, including the temperament of its people and the likely and overthrow a country's religion when establishing a new
nature of its government (Book 14). To support this assertion regime. Religious tolerance is a good thing, in his view,
Montesquieu remarks on the cultural differences between provided it does not open the door to the overthrow of a
"cold" regions, such as Scandinavia or Russia, and "hot" country's established religion.
regions such as India. Three books on slavery and servitude
follow, each asserting a role for climate in determining what Book 26 brings together, a little haphazardly at times, the many
makes a people free or enslaved. Book 15, the first of these, different types of law, moral code, and manners that keep a
discusses civil slavery, which is closest to the modern meaning society functioning. Montesquieu's main concern in this book is
of the word slavery. From there Montesquieu moves on to to lay down boundaries between laws affecting a citizen's
discuss domestic slavery (Book 16), meaning the subjection of political rights (rights with respect to the state) and those
wives and children to a husband's authority, and political affecting civil rights (rights with respect to other citizens).
servitude to a ruler (Book 17). Terrain, he argues, complements
climate as an influence on a country's political life (Book 18). To
further organize his arguments, Montesquieu attempts to tease Part 6
out the differences among a country's laws, its mores (basic
social conventions), and its manners (Book 19). This last section contains the closest thing to a definitive
conclusion in The Spirit of the Laws, sandwiched between
some extremely lengthy chapters on legal history. Book 27, in a
Part 4 single long chapter, traces the Roman inheritance laws from
the founding of the Roman kingdom through the rise of the
Montesquieu next describes the various laws related to Byzantine Empire. Book 28 is likewise highly topical, dealing
commerce (Book 20), concentrating his survey on the ancient with the medieval origins of the French code of civil laws. In
Mediterranean and modern Europe. In Book 21 he shows how Book 29, which can plausibly be considered the work's real

conclusion, Montesquieu offers some abstract advice on "the

way to compose the laws." Books 30 and 31 are essentially a
long appendix dealing with the feudal laws among the Franks,
the Germanic peoples who established medieval France as a
separate kingdom.

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Part Summaries 11
c Part Summaries Analysis

What Montesquieu calls "natural law" is a major force behind
his recommendations throughout Part 1. The concept originally
Part 1, Books 1–2 arose in a religious context as theologians sought a set of
unchanging moral principles common to all humanity. Their
theory held that God had imprinted a certain basic code of
Summary conduct on humankind and that its principles could be
discovered independent of revealed religion. Thus, anyone in
any part of the world could be held accountable for murder or
Book 1: On Laws in General theft, since one need only "read" the natural law in one's own
heart to discover that these actions are wrong. Much has been
Montesquieu (1689–1755) begins The Spirit of the Laws by written about where to draw the line between universal, natural
observing that laws are not only a human concern. Nature has law and context-specific religious principles.
its own consistent and immutable laws—given, Montesquieu
Importantly, when Montesquieu speaks of natural law, he is not
asserts, by God. Without such laws the world would be mere
describing simply the physical laws of nature, though he
chaos. These natural laws include the laws of human nature,
mentions those too in Book 1. Rather, he wants to present the
which serve as the fundamental basis for all human societies.
reader with a hierarchical, almost clockwork-like system in
Positive laws, those created and written down by humans, are which positive law—the law instituted by humans—is the most
inconsistent and changeful. Nonetheless, some system of complicated and fragile component. The simplest laws (like
positive law is an inevitable consequence of human nature. If gravity) are assumed by Montesquieu to function the same in
effective, such a system safeguards both the rights of the all places and times. They affect not only humans and animals
society as a whole and the rights of the individuals both but also inanimate objects such as planets and moons. Natural
politically (within society) and civilly (among themselves). To law in the sense described above is more complex and applies
accomplish this balance, lawmakers must consider the nature to only humans, and it applies to all humans. The principles of
of the government in which they operate, as well as the climate religion, manners, and what Montesquieu calls mores (basic
and terrain of their land. Montesquieu's main project in The social rules) are specific to the world's various civilizations but
Spirit of the Law will be to survey these different are often more deeply rooted than the laws made by
considerations in an organized way. legislatures. Positive law is time- and place-dependent and, as
such, must be made with reference to physical law, natural law,
and religious and cultural norms.
Book 2: On Laws Deriving Directly from
the Nature of the Government
Part 1, Book 3
There are, Montesquieu declares, three basic types of
government: republican, monarchical, and despotic. In a
republic sovereignty resides in a group of people. This can be Summary
either a democracy, wherein all the people have a say, or an
aristocracy, wherein a privileged minority hold the power. A
monarchy is a government in which one person rules but in Book 3: On the Principles of the Three
accordance with established laws. In a despotic state, too,
there is a single ruler, but the ruler is not bound by law: instead,
Governments
his will is law. Each of these governments requires different
Having laid out the three main types of government (Book 2),
rules and customs to sustain it.
Montesquieu now searches for the principle that causes each
government to function. A republic, he says, is driven by virtue,

because the people themselves are in charge. This is true to "just" a monarchy, with no other relevant characteristics. He is
some degree of both a democracy and an aristocracy, but in a aware of the differences within each government type and,
democracy virtue is absolutely indispensable. In an aristocracy moreover, aware of the potential for a blurring of lines between
Montesquieu concedes, virtue is not "absolutely required," any two categories. In Book 8 Montesquieu will describe
because aristocratic structures have a greater power to political corruption as this kind of blurring, with a monarchy or
sustain themselves than do democracies. If the citizens of a a republic taking on despotism-like characteristics. It can help
democracy become corrupt and unvirtuous, the days of that to think of Montesquieu's categorization as a sort of gradient,
democracy are numbered. like the ones used to choose colors in a graphic-design
program. Some regimes are overwhelmingly monarchical, just
Monarchies, Montesquieu asserts, are driven by a different as the color of a stop sign is red, with no detectable trace of
principle: honor. In a monarchy the people compete for the blue or green. Some regimes are clearly republics and would
ruler's favor, and this competition is enlivened by placing a high be hard to mistake for anything else, just as the sky on a sunny
value on honor. Monarchical cultures often give their day is unmistakably blue. However, Montesquieu also
subjects—at least their more powerful subjects—a certain considers plenty of in-between states: monarchies with a
leeway to violate the law when obeying the law would violate a representative element, for example, or republics in the
code of honor. In a sense monarchies function by channeling process of succumbing to tyranny.
the selfishness and ambition of their subjects into services to
the state.
In despotic states, however, the ruler's power is too absolute Part 1, Books 4–5
to leave much room for virtue or honor. The subjects cannot be
expected to be virtuous, because they have neither a role
model in their ruler nor any expectation of being rewarded for Summary
virtue. They also cannot be honorable, since they do not have
the political freedom to act honorably and risk incurring the
despot's displeasure. Instead, the subjects of a despot are Book 4: That the Laws of Education
motivated by fear, the sole source of their obedience.
Should Be Relative to the Principles of
the Government
Analysis
In order to sustain a government, Montesquieu argues, it is
This short chapter acts as the fulcrum of Montesquieu's entire necessary to educate the people to share the government's
treatise. Almost all his recommendations in Parts 1 through 5, values. This means cultivating honor in the subjects of a
and many of his historical insights in Part 6, appear in terms of monarchy, virtue in the citizens of a republic, and fear in the
the three-part division of government he proposes here. At the servants of a despotic regime. To educate people in honorable
same time the idea of splitting governments up into just a behavior, he says, it is sufficient to expose them to examples
handful of categories can come across as simplistic. A student of honor in real life—for instance, at the court of a king or
of modern political science might object on the grounds that nobleman. Formal schooling is a secondary matter. In a
"democracy" alone is an endlessly diverse category, embracing despotic state, meanwhile, education is useless except as it
everything from ancient Greek direct democracy to the conditions the people to obey authorities unquestioningly. Only
present-day United States, with its bicameral legislature and in republics is "the full power of education," beginning at home
indirect presidential elections. Likewise, someone with a and continuing in formal institutions, essential to the
background in ancient history might take issue with a plan that government's project. As success stories in this respect,
assumes a clear distinction between monarchies and despotic Montesquieu points to the ancient Greek city-states of Sparta
regimes. (Lacedaemon) and Athens, both of which, despite their very
different cultures, successfully transmitted their values to
Montesquieu, however, is not proposing a hard-and-fast
successive generations. He concludes by recommending
categorization scheme in which a state is "just" a republic or
music as a pastime which can "soften" a people and prevent

them from becoming harsh or savage. in power, such as tampering with an established religion or
burdening the people with excessive taxes. "I'm not saying
despotism is a good thing," he seems to say, "but if you happen
Book 5: The Laws Given by the to be a despot, here are the main considerations in running
your country."
Legislator Should Be Relative to the
Principle of the Government Montesquieu's real feelings regarding the different systems of
government are not, however, hard to discern. His hatred of
Montesquieu now applies a similar logic to laws in general. In a despotism breaks through at intervals in outbursts of
republic, he says, laws should cultivate virtue not only in the incredulity or moral disgust, and in his refusal—ostensibly from
young but in the citizenry as a whole. By encouraging frugality, shock—to print the more sordid details of life in despotic
for instance, laws can keep citizens from growing greedy and regimes. His admiration for republican values is likewise clear
self-serving. Some ancient states, such as Sparta, aimed at this from the many favorable remarks he makes about England, the
by dividing up lands equally among the citizens. In modern Low Countries, and Switzerland. Each of these countries had
nations, Montesquieu concedes, it is easier to place limits on devised a system which put power, to a greater or lesser
wills, dowries, and other vehicles by which wealth changes extent, in the hands of the people and their representatives.
hands. Such restrictions are, he adds, less necessary in a
In his private and professional life, moreover, Montesquieu was
commercial republic, since people will naturally be frugal and
evidently proud or at least content to be part of a monarchical
hard-working where commerce is widely established. In an
society. Throughout The Spirit of the Laws he defends his own
aristocracy, however, it is necessary to keep the nobles from
advantages as necessary consequences of monarchy. The
joining large wealth to their already highly concentrated
hereditary nature of noble titles—Baron de La Brède, for
political influence. For this reason Montesquieu warns against
example—is, he says, a safeguard against those titles losing
allowing nobles to collect taxes.
their luster. The buying and selling of public offices, like the
In a monarchy honor is preserved by keeping titles and the presidency Montesquieu inherited from his uncle and later
lands that support them within a single family. A monarchy can sold, can likewise be justified by the specific political needs of
therefore thrive on inheritance customs that would ruin a monarchy. The market, though Montesquieu does not use this
republic. The laws of a monarchy should also provide a kind of exact word, is a better way of sorting out who is qualified to
counterweight to keep a ruler from acting too rashly. Finally, in perform each office than is an arbitrary choice made by a
a despotic state few laws are necessary—just enough to keep prince. Thus, a prince can dole out the offices as a type of
the people in their lane, so to speak. In fact, some practices are honor to the worthy, and those with the ingenuity and work
acceptable (politically speaking) under a despot, even though ethic to profit from those offices can buy them later.
they would be poisonous to a monarchy or republic. For Montesquieu readily admits that neither hereditary titles nor
instance, despots accept or even demand gifts from their the sale of public offices can be defended in a republic, which
subjects, but in other forms of government this is the crime of runs on different principles than a monarchy does.
bribery.
Part 1, Books 6–7

Analysis
Montesquieu clearly prefers "moderate" regimes—his catchall
Summary
term for republics and monarchies—to despotism.
Nonetheless, he spends much of Part 1 in the mode of a neutral
adviser who takes the type of government for granted and
Book 6: Consequences of the Principles
recommends ways only to preserve it. Thus, even though he
abhors torture, he points out its usefulness in instilling fear, as
any despotic regime must do. Later, he also remarks on the
(relatively few) things a despot cannot do and expect to remain

"restraint" on women's behavior, he argues, is characteristic of

of the Various Governments in Relation
monarchies, and in republics women are more readily
to the Simplicity of Civil and Criminal controlled by social norms than by positive law. Laws are
required to restrict luxury and prevent other forms of excess
Laws, the Form of Judgments, and the
(e.g., adultery) only when a republic's mores have weakened
Establishment of Penalties considerably. Women should not be in charge of households,
Montesquieu opines, but they can make excellent rulers.
In Book 5 Montesquieu considered the laws that were required
or preferred in different types of regimes. Here, he gives some
additional thought to the structure of the courts and of the Analysis
penal code. In monarchies and republics, he says, the court
system needs to be somewhat more elaborate than in despotic Sumptuary laws may seem quaint today, but they were a
states, to ensure the liberty of the individual. Judges in frequently-used tool of public policy in medieval and early
monarchies can deliberate together and arrive at an modern Europe. Occasionally found in ancient Greek legal
interpretation of the law, but in republics it is essential that the codes, the laws as a group get their name from the leges
law be precise enough to follow to the letter. Monarchs and sumptuariae of ancient Rome, which restricted luxury in food
their ministers should not, he urges, act as judges themselves, and dress. (The word sumptus literally means "an expense or
since such behavior is consistent only with despotism. Criminal charge," but its meaning gradually drifted closer to the luxury
penalties must be mild in a monarchy, and milder still in a implied by the English sumptuous.) As Montesquieu points out,
republic, compared to the harsh punishments of a despotic citizens of the Roman Republic were unimpressed with what
regime. Moreover, punishments must be proportionate to the today would be called conspicuous consumption. In addition to
crime: if the penalties for robbery and murder are equally instituting sumptuary laws, they elected officials called censors
severe, robbers will have no incentive ever to spare their who had the legal authority to punish people for excessively
victims' lives. Fathers should not be punished for their luxurious living.
children's crimes, nor should torture be used as an
investigative tool. In the regimes that employed them—not only ancient Rome but
also France and England—sumptuary laws could sometimes be
absurdly precise. English laws under English Queen Elizabeth I
Book 7: Consequences of the Different (1533–1603) prescribed the appropriate fabrics for hats and
bonnets; one French statute set legal limits on the length of a
Principles of the Three Governments in person's shoes. Arguably, sumptuary laws tended to serve the
Relation to the Sumptuary Laws, Luxury, ends of the rulers, the nobility, and the very poor at the
expense of middle- and upper-class commoners. The rulers
and the Condition of Women benefited from the reinforcement of a strict social hierarchy,
since the luxuries a person could enjoy depended on his or her
The three types of regimes also have different relationships to
position within society. The nobility benefited because wealthy
luxury. In despotic states extreme inequality necessarily gives
commoners were barred from enjoying certain luxuries, which
rise to extreme luxury, but in republics luxury is a symptom of
then came to serve as markers of noble rank. The poor
encroaching inequality. To head off such inequality,
benefited, too, since sumptuary laws restricted the more
Montesquieu says, it helps to have an expensive public
frivolous ways in which nobles and wealthy merchants could
institution—such as the ancient Greek or Roman festivals—to
spend their money.
which the leading citizens are expected to contribute.
Monarchies, unlike republics, thrive on luxury because it To a modern sensibility there is an undeniable whiff of sexism
reinforces distinctions of rank. Laws restricting displays of to Montesquieu's writings in Book 7. His firm insistence that
luxury, called sumptuary laws, should be used sparingly. women should not run households is somewhat hypocritical:
Montesquieu frequently left his wife in charge of their La Brède
Montesquieu next takes up "the condition of women," which he
estate, and she seems if anything to have been an abler
views as an issue related to luxury and inequality. A lack of
businessperson than he was. Fortunately, Montesquieu's

biases are less blinding concerning the issue of a woman's less by default. When those same principles have been
ruling a country. Giving credit where credit is due, he corrupted, even the best laws and institutions will be turned
acknowledges the successful reigns of both Russian empress into weapons of abuse. In a final chapter Montesquieu reviews
Catherine I (1684–1727) and Elizabeth I of England. contemporary writings on China and pronounces it, with its
vast territory and autocratic rulers, a despotic state.
Part 1, Book 8
Analysis
This book, unusually concise and abstract by Montesquieu's
Summary standards, almost speaks for itself. It should be noted,
however, that what Montesquieu calls "corruption" is a
different creature from the corruption complained of in modern
Book 8: On the Corruption of the government. To give just one example, venality (the buying and
Principles of the Three Governments selling of public offices) is illegal in many modern democracies.
Lobbying, though not usually against the law, is widely viewed
"The corruption of each government," Montesquieu asserts, with suspicion because of its potential to privilege powerful
"almost always begins with that of its principles." For a commercial interests over the will of the people. Neither one of
democracy this can occur in two major ways: either the spirit these, however, would make a government "corrupt" in
of equality is lost or a "spirit of extreme equality" takes hold, in Montesquieu's sense of the word. Modern politicians
which nobody can stand to be led or governed. Either way, the sometimes campaign on a promise to "drain the swamp," but
love of virtue—the "spring" driving any democracy—is lost, and Montesquieu cared more about stirring the swamp to keep it
democratic rule gives way to either oligarchy or tyranny. In an from growing stagnant.
aristocracy, too, corruption is complete when virtue is lost. This
happens when the nobles who rule the country no longer Far from confining its venality to gentlemen's agreements and
submit to the law. A hereditary nobility is, Montesquieu says, a backroom deals, early modern France had a well-established
virtual guarantee of such corruption because it allows the set of venal offices. In Montesquieu's time such offices
nobles to consolidate power at the expense of their own numbered over 50,000 by some counts; most, like
security. A republic of either kind, he adds, can generally retain Montesquieu's post in the Bordeaux appeals court, were
its integrity only when its territorial extent is small, since judicial in nature. The sale and purchase of these offices were
people's reliance on their homeland diminishes as the territory not only openly recognized but actually enshrined in French
grows large. law as a way for the crown to raise funds. Moreover, such
offices offered a prime working example of the monarchical
Monarchies, too, can become corrupt if the monarch gives in to culture of honor, since those who sought to buy them were
the urge to micromanage, rather than delegating significant often wealthy members of the merchant class hoping to be
portions of his power and authority to others. Honor, in ennobled. Above and beyond the revenue one might obtain as,
Montesquieu's view is the principle of a monarchy, and it is for instance, an appeals judge, public offices carried a kind of
impossible to sustain an honor-based culture when the awards "honor premium" that made them attractive to commoners.
and titles conferred by a prince have no relation to a person's
merit. Monarchies, he argues, are by nature inclined to be "of a Thus, from Montesquieu's point of view a monarchy did not risk
medium size": larger than republics but smaller than despotic becoming corrupt through mere venality. Indeed, he regarded
regimes. Those despotic governments, he goes on to say, do venality almost as a sign of health, since it meant the king was
not have to wait for their principles to be corrupted. Rather, taking an appropriately hands-off approach to the low- and
they are "corrupt by nature" and tend to fall apart all on their mid-level management of the realm. The presence of many
own unless some "accident of nature" holds them together. offices, whether inherited or sold, meant that power was
shared out among many hands, not concentrated despotically
When a state's principles remain uncorrupted, Montesquieu in the person of the ruler. Whose hands mattered less, as long
says, the government and laws will tend to be good more or as a culture of honor kept all of the players in open

competition. legacy of Macedonian king Alexander the Great (356–23 BCE),

who was famously generous to the peoples he subjugated.
Finally, Montesquieu considers the conquests made by a
Part 2, Books 9–10 despotic state. Those, he says, should be secured by
appointing kings or vassals to rule over the new territories in
the despot's stead.
Summary
Analysis
Book 9: On the Laws in Their Relation Montesquieu's doctrines of war and conquest represent an
with Defensive Force area in which he diverges sharply from 21st-century
sensibilities. Because his ideas were instrumental in the
Since republics are by their nature small, Montesquieu says, founding of modern democracies, it can be tempting to think of
they must band together into federations in order to defend Montesquieu as a sort of evangelist of political liberty. This is
themselves from invasion. Such alliances are, he argues, an exaggeration at best and, at worst, a distortion of the truth.
stable, because the members of the federation keep each In fact, Montesquieu takes it for granted that a country has the
other in check. Limitations need to be set, however, on the right to expand its territory at the expense of its neighbors—at
war- and treaty-making power of the federation members, lest least if those neighbors are threatening to do the same. It
the entire group be dragged into a conflict or bound by an would indeed have been very awkward for Montesquieu to
unwanted truce. Despotic states can provide for their defense speak out against wars of conquest, since the France of his
by leaving a perimeter of wasteland near their borders, day was built by such wars. Substantial territorial gains of this
whereas monarchies must build forts and recruit standing kind had been made under Louis XIV (1638–1715), the great-
armies. This is one reason that, as argued earlier, a monarchy grandfather and direct predecessor of the monarch who
should not have too great a territorial extent. If a country is too reigned as Montesquieu wrote.
big for an army to cross it in a few weeks at most, it is also too
big to defend against a sudden invasion. It is more important By the mid-18th century the right of conquest had a long
for a country to be larger and more powerful than its neighbors history not only in France but throughout Europe. Montesquieu,
("relative size") than it is for the country simply to grow as large aware of this history, cites examples from ancient Greece
as possible ("real size"). onward. Moreover, for over a century after Montesquieu's
death, territorial wars in Europe would continue to be fought
under the assumption "to the victor go the spoils." International
Book 10: On Laws in the Relation with law in the era of French emperor Napoleon I (1769–1821), for
instance, set bounds on what could be taken, but it did not
Offensive Force completely forbid one country from annexing or conquering
another. The right of conquest was only definitively abolished
Nations, Montesquieu argues, have the right to make war to
only in the wake of World War II (1939–45). The Nuremberg
protect themselves and can sometimes undertake wars of
Principles, the United Nations-authored rules for determining
aggression as a type of preemptive self-defense. When such a
what counts as a war crime, explicitly outlawed wars of
war results in conquest, a nation has the responsibility to
aggression as a "crime against peace." Interestingly, many of
preserve, not destroy, what it has conquered. Montesquieu
the other crimes codified in the Nuremberg
deplores the idea of slaughtering a conquered state's
Principles—including the infamous "crimes against
inhabitants, though he admits that sometimes it may be
humanity"—are ones against which Montesquieu speaks out in
necessary to reduce them to servitude for a time. When
these chapters.
republics conquer, they must quickly grant some political rights
to the conquered, or the double standard—a republic acting as
a monarchy—will breed resentment. As an example of how
conquests ought to be carried out, Montesquieu upholds the

Part 2, Books 11–12 Analysis

Montesquieu's fondness for the early modern English style of
government deserves some explaining, as does his tendency
Summary to see ancient Rome as free at some times but not others. In
the mid-17th century England had undergone a transition from
monarchy to parliamentary republic and then back to
Book 11: On the Laws that Form Political monarchy. The civil war that occasioned this change (1642–51)
Liberty in Its Relation with the both led to and overlapped with the Interregnum (1649–60),
the 11-year period during which England had no monarch.
Constitution When the monarchy was restored in 1660, Parliament
nonetheless succeeded in retaining a greater share of power
Montesquieu now turns his focus to domestic policy—in
than it had enjoyed before the war. This made England a sort
particular, to the problem of how much political liberty can be
of hybrid system under Montesquieu's rubric—what today
attained in different regimes. He notes that no style of
would be called a constitutional monarchy. The English Bill of
government is inherently "free," but monarchies and republics
Rights, passed in 1689, established many of the civil rights that
have a chance of being so. This book also contains
would later be enshrined in the constitutions of the French and
Montesquieu's famous reflections on the separation of
American republics. Thus, in the year of Montesquieu's birth,
powers—the division of governmental power among a judiciary,
England affirmed its possession of the essential
an executive, and a legislative branch. Where such separation
characteristics of a "moderate" regime.
is not observed, Montesquieu says, governments are seldom
stable and never free. The latter half of Book 11 consists of In The Spirit of the Laws as a whole, Montesquieu cites the
observations concerning the separation of powers in different history of Rome from its foundation in the 8th century BCE to
countries, beginning with England, whose government its fall in the West (476 CE) and beyond. Here, however,
Montesquieu admires. Montesquieu traces the rise and fall of Montesquieu is concerned mainly with the Roman Republic
political liberty in ancient Rome alongside the separation and (509–27 BCE), established after the overthrow of the last
consolidation of political power. Roman king. The point Montesquieu makes here is that the
laws of the republic were not a monolith, guaranteeing the
same rights at all times. Rather, the offices and institutions of
Book 12: On the Laws that Form Political the Roman government changed repeatedly over the five
Liberty in Relation to the Citizen centuries of its existence. Rome's return to a monarchical form
of government—the Roman Empire—brought a progressive
Next, Montesquieu drills down to the level of individual rights. narrowing of the civil rights enjoyed by ordinary Roman
He warns against several legislative practices that can seem citizens.
essential to national security when in fact they weaken the
nation. An example of such a practice is the tendency to make
treason laws overly broad, so that mere words without Part 2, Book 13
subsequent actions can be considered treasonous. He likewise
advises against laws severely punishing crimes that by their
nature can have few or no witnesses, such as sorcery, or which
Summary
are too open to interpretation, such as heresy. Laws
oppressing debtors are also to be avoided, as are laws
compelling people to testify against one another. Most of this
Book 13: On the Relations That the Levy
discussion is offered with monarchies in mind but also applies
to republics. Montesquieu acknowledges, however, that a of Taxes and the Size of Public
despotic state can have only "a little liberty" compared to the
other two types of government.

abolish the sale or "farming out" of all government offices. In

Revenues Have with Liberty
fact, as a judge in the Bordeaux appellate court (called the
Montesquieu has a few relatively simple points to make about parlement), Montesquieu benefited from the ownership of such
taxation, though these receive the usual comparative an office for much of his adult life. He felt, however, that tax
treatment across different kingdoms, empires, and republics. farming was a system particularly prone to abuse, since it put
Taxes, he says, should be carefully regulated: the more liberty public money into private hands and then tasked the
the citizens enjoy, the higher the taxes can be. In extreme government with making sure it found its way to the treasury.
cases, like serfdom, taxes should be kept low and constant, so As it happened, Montesquieu's outcry against tax-farming did
that those who work the land do not run away, rebel, or resort not bring about any immediate change in French taxation
to crime. practices. Instead, as Johnson and Koyama note, the cabal tax
farming system remained in place right up to the French
Although taxes can be placed on people, lands, or goods, Revolution.
Montesquieu believes the latter are the least bothersome. He
advocates for the levying of taxes on commodities at the time
of sale, something similar to a modern sales tax. By taking the Part 3, Books 14–18
tax from the seller rather than the buyer, Montesquieu says,
the government can preserve the "illusion" that no tax at all is
paid—at least from the buyer's point of view.
Summary
Returning to his central point about taxation and liberty,
In these five short books Montesquieu argues that the climate
Montesquieu observes that it is possible to overtax even a free
of a country does, and should, influence its laws. Laws relating
people. Doing so will have the net effect of undermining liberty
to labor, including slavery, are a special concern.
and in the long run diminishing overall tax revenue as well.
Book 13 closes with some sharp words against the then still
widespread practice of tax-farming. Tax collection,
Book 14: On the Laws in Their Relation
Montesquieu says, should be undertaken by the government
directly. to the Nature of the Climate
Montesquieu begins with a theory of climate's influence on
Analysis human temperament. People in colder climates, he says, are
less passionate but also more disciplined and less violent. Their
The concept of tax-farming may be unfamiliar to modern tissues, he says, are tightened by the cold, making them more
readers, since in most countries today taxes are paid directly resilient and vigorous. He asserts the opposite for warmer
to the government. In the Middle Ages, however, France and climates, where—so he says—heat slackens tissues, thins the
England—as well as other nations—"farmed out" the right to blood, and makes nerves more susceptible to pleasure and
collect taxes to private individuals, who could keep a portion of pain. From this basic difference, Montesquieu argues, arise
what they gathered. In the 17th century both countries persistent differences in customs, religions, and manners. Wise
switched to what economic historians Noel D. Johnson and laws allow for the influence of climate and do not try to fight it.
Mark Koyama (2014) call "cabal tax farming," in which a small
group or "cabal" was granted the exclusive privilege of
collecting taxes. Tax farmers were, unsurprisingly, unpopular Book 15: How the Laws of Civil Slavery
figures in the realms in which they operated. The "tax
are Related with the Nature of the
collectors" mentioned in the Bible—the ones Jesus is criticized
for associating with—were beneficiaries of a tax-farming Climate
system, as is the greedy Sheriff of Nottingham in Robin Hood.
One consequence of these climate-induced differences of
Again, it is important to appreciate the fineness of the character, Montesquieu says, is a difference in customs of
distinctions that Montesquieu is drawing. He does not want to slavery and servitude. For his part Montesquieu does not

condone slavery; he merely concedes that it is practiced more climate is considered. Many customs depend, for instance, on
successfully in certain climates than in others. In temperate whether a nation possesses land suitable for farming. The
and cold climates, prevalent in most of Europe, Montesquieu medieval Germans, living in a heavily forested part of the world,
deems slavery both "useless" and unnatural. If a country insists did not cultivate the land, and their laws were thus based more
on sanctioning slavery, he adds, care must be taken to regulate on kinship than on territory or property rights. Such peoples do
the exact nature of the relationship between slaves and not use money, Montesquieu says, but conduct their
masters. commerce by barter. They lack "even the idea of luxury" and
thus have no incentive to commit many of the nonviolent
crimes (e.g., fraud) widespread in sedentary cultures.
Book 16: How the Laws of Domestic
Slavery are Related to the Nature of the
Analysis
Climate
Montesquieu's persistence in tracing national characteristics
Montesquieu now moves to a discussion of women's back to climate may seem strange to a modern reader. In
household servitude in patriarchal cultures. Here, too, he particular, when compared to his other major theoretical
identifies a geographic pattern, since polygamy is more contributions—the three types of government (Part 1) and the
common in hot climates. Men in cold climates, meanwhile, are separation of powers (Part 2, Book 11)—the emphasis on
fond of drinking and behaving "intemperately," and legally- climate as a master key to understanding culture can come
mandated monogamy help rein in the chaos. Montesquieu across as embarrassingly simplistic. Although it is easy to
favors access to divorce in cultures where married women name examples of cultural norms predicated on climate (for
have some independence. The less liberty women enjoy, he instance, the Spanish siesta or the wearing of Bermuda
suggests, the less freedom a husband should have in divorcing shorts), an extrapolation such as Montesquieu attempts is
or repudiating his wife or wives. another story.
It should be remembered, however, that Montesquieu was

Book 17: How the Laws of Political living in an era of disorientingly-rapid scientific discovery.
Encouraged by advances in chemistry and physics—optics in
Servitude are Related to the Nature of particular—the minds of the European Enlightenment often
the Climate believed they could find concise scientific laws to describe any
natural phenomenon, no matter how seemingly complex.
This book, a mere half-dozen pages in length, extrapolates Montesquieu, who continued his own natural-science studies
from Montesquieu's observations on civil and domestic slavery. well into adult life, was no exception in his quest for the
He argues, in essence, that warm weather makes people weak principles at the heart of human political behavior. Thus, in
and cowardly, leaving them prone to be tyrannized by despotic claiming a scientific basis for his theories of national character,
rulers. As "proof," he describes the despotic regimes reported as he does here, Montesquieu is no doubt jumping the
to exist in Asia. This naturally poses the problem of why gun—but he is also participating in the scientific optimism of his
despotism is not restricted to southern Asia, where the age. A systematic description of human personalities and
weather is warm. Montesquieu dismisses this idea by temperaments must have seemed within reach in a society that
suggesting that the Asian landmass is easier to traverse than was daily discovering how to see farther into space and closer
Europe, so that despotism tends to spread north. into the cells of the body.
It's worth noting, too, that Montesquieu's

Book 18: On the Laws in Their Relation contemporaries—including practicing scientists—sometimes
praised his own work in decidedly scientific terms. The Swiss
with the Nature of the Terrain philosopher and scientist Charles Bonnet (1720–93), for
instance, was so astonished by Montesquieu's work that he
A few further complications arise when terrain as well as
wrote him a sort of fan-letter in 1753. "Newton discovered the

laws of the material world," Bonnet proclaimed; "you have hardly be called disinterested chroniclers. The Jesuits, who
discovered, sir, the laws of the intellectual world." arrived in Japan in 1549 only to find that the preaching of
Christianity was punishable by death, could not have received
a favorable first impression given that their whole purpose in
Part 3, Book 19 Japan was to preach Christianity. Their later writings, as of
their confreres in China (mission est. 1552), tend to draw a
close connection between the cruelty of autocratic rule and
Summary the absence of Christianity as a cultural force. Meanwhile in

southern Europe, the Inquisition was showing that Christianity
and autocratic excess could coexist without difficulty.
Book 19: On the Laws in the Relation The hypothetical country mentioned in the final chapter,
with the Principles Forming the General though not named by Montesquieu, can be confidently
identified as England. Here, unlike in his writings about China,
Spirit, the Mores, and the Manners of a Montesquieu is working from considerable firsthand
experience. The publication of Montesquieu's Persian Letters
Nation
in 1721 had made him a literary celebrity and brought him into
Though not much longer than the other books of Part 3, this contact with several English courtiers, whom he proceeded to
book pivots away from the topic of climate and starts in on a visit on their home turf between 1729 and 1731. His remarks
new subject. Montesquieu now takes stock of the full range of about English art, society, and culture, though sometimes
social and cultural forces that hold a nation together, apart fancifully phrased, thus have the quality of firsthand
from its positive laws. The word "spirit" is Montesquieu's observation.
catchall term for such forces. Thus, the spirit of the imperial
Romans was too egalitarian for an overt monarchy but was
content with an emperor who proclaimed himself the "first Part 4, Books 20–21
citizen." Among the ancient Greek city-states, the Spartans
had a warlike spirit, while the Athenians were sophisticated
and fond of high culture. Summary
Much of the rest of the book consists of Montesquieu's
interpretation of the "spirits" of different cultures, including
those of Spain, Japan, and China. In among these observations
is some practical advice: a prince "must reform by laws what is to Commerce, Considered in Its Nature
established by laws and change by manners what is
established by manners," never mixing the two. A law banning a
and Its Distinctions
people from wearing their traditional apparel, for instance, is
Montesquieu begins this book by calling upon the Muses, the
"tyrannical." The book closes by resuming the discussion of
Greek goddesses of art and poetry, to bless his work. He then
England from Part 2, Book 11 and showing how England's laws
remarks on the "spirit of commerce," a civilizing force that
are suited to the spirit of the country.
encourages peace among nations but competition among
individuals. Different types of government, he says, have their
own characteristic forms of commerce: monarchies tend to be
Analysis heavy importers of luxury goods, whereas republics tend to
engage in an "economic commerce" involving both imports and
Book 19 illustrates the profound difference between
exports.
Montesquieu's knowledge of East Asian cultures and his
knowledge of both ancient and contemporary Europe. Many of There are, Montesquieu acknowledges, many different types
the works cited on China and Japan are the writings of of laws and national policies concerning commerce. He
European missionaries—who, if not untrustworthy per se, can

considers it foolish for one country to prohibit trade with perspective. To be more specific, he is a proponent of the
another "without great reasons," but he admits that other types mercantilism—the tendency to promote trade as a matter of
of trade restrictions (tariffs, for instance, or export bans) can national policy—of his time. He names, and approves of, several
be useful. As a kind of tax, he says, import and export duties methods used by France, England, and other early modern
should not be farmed out to private tax collectors but should European states to regulate commerce, including the various
be collected by the government directly. Nobles and monarchs duties placed on imports and exports. In other words,
should not engage in commerce at all, since this would Montesquieu is not a believer in unfettered free trade: although
suppress the competition on which trade thrives. Some he sees commerce as beneficial in general, he also considers it
nations—those rich in necessities and poor in luxuries—would, wise and productive for countries to try and reap a larger
Montesquieu speculates, be better off if they shunned share of its benefits. To a greater extent than later
international trade. economists—notably Scottish philosopher and economist
Adam Smith (1723–90)—Montesquieu deems it possible for a
country to restrict traders' behavior without hindering
Book 21: On Laws in Their Relation to commerce overall.
Commerce, Considered in the Because trade is so closely connected to the prosperity of

Revolutions It Has Had in the World Europe, Montesquieu takes a very dim view of isolationism, in
which a country walls itself off commercially or politically. In
This longer book concerns the "revolutions"—meaning social particular, he considers Japan's sakoku ("closed country")
and technological changes—global commerce has undergone. policy, which remained in effect until 1853, to be extremely ill-
These are essentially a two-way street: commerce both conceived. By limiting its trading partners to China and the
influences and is influenced by the overall culture in which it Netherlands, he argues, Japan is essentially leaving money on
takes place. As an example of the former, Montesquieu argues the table—paying more than it would for imports, and receiving
that commerce shaped the civilizations of the ancient less for exports, than it would in a competitive market. As
Mediterranean by giving them the wealth and hence the luxury always, Montesquieu is willing to admit exceptions to the rule,
needed to pursue the arts. The other type of influence is seen however. Poland, he says, would do much better for its
in technological developments, particularly those in common people if its noblemen could somehow be prevented
shipbuilding and navigation, which open up the world to trade. from selling off food crops to purchase foreign luxuries.
The latter two-thirds of the book are a historical narrative
showing these two principles in action from ancient times to
the early modern era. Part 4, Book 22
Analysis Summary
The invocation to the Muses is a standard device of epic
poetry, appearing at the beginning of Homer's Odyssey and
Book 22: On Laws in Their Relation to
Virgil's Aeneid, among others. Thus, it's somewhat unusual to
encounter such an invocation in a nonfiction text on political the Use of Money
theory. By including such a gesture, Montesquieu may be
suggesting that he sees himself not only as a philosopher or a "Money," Montesquieu declares, "is a sign representing the
scholar, but also as an artist, a poet. He may also be reminding value of all commodities." Gold and silver are the most typical
readers that history is an art—with its own Muse, named materials used as money, but in some cases land can be
Clio—as well as a science. Whatever his precise intention may exchanged so freely that it forms a kind of currency in itself.
have been, Montesquieu's invocation provides a sort of rest Paper currency, increasingly common in Montesquieu's time, is
stop near the halfway point of his long work. also acknowledged. Montesquieu also draws a distinction
between real monies, meaning currency with a specified
In general Montesquieu writes from a pro-commerce content of precious metal, and ideal monies that merely

represent a certain amount of value. Although the fluctuations Montesquieu, he is wary of attempts to hamper international
in value of ideal monies are more obvious, Montesquieu notes trade or rig the game, so to speak, by manipulating currency
that real monies too can decline or rise in value as the supply values. It is a testament to Montesquieu's influence that,
of precious metals becomes ampler or more restricted. compared to some of his contemporaries, he said so little on
Fundamentally, gold and silver are commodities like anything economics yet achieved the reputation he did. An illustration of
else: they just happen to be more durable and convenient for this lasting legacy can be found in the work of the great 20th-
exchange. century British economist John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946),
who praised Montesquieu as "the real French equivalent of
Next, Montesquieu comments at length on the different Adam Smith ... the greatest of [France's] economists."
"operations" a nation can take with regard to its money supply.
The most fundamental such "operation" is debasement, in Montesquieu cites two major examples to show what happens
which the amount of precious metal in a given currency unit is when lending at interest is either restricted or forbidden. His
reduced but the currency's nominal value remains the same. first example comes from the "Mahommedan" (i.e., Islamic)
Modern nations, he says, don't gain as much as they think by nations, where lending at interest is banned outright. Usury,
debasing their currencies, because other countries quickly known as riba in sharia law, is forbidden in Islam, and this
become aware of changes in the content of, for instance, a prohibition takes the form of a complete ban on the charging
French livre coin. Instead, it is the bankers who profit, because of interest. Even today, countries with sharia-influenced legal
they have the resources to respond more quickly to changes in systems, such as Saudi Arabia, prohibit interest-bearing
coinage than an ordinary consumer or merchant can. financial instruments. An entire industry of "sharia-compliant
Montesquieu also cautions against the drafting of laws that finance" has arisen to fill the gap.
hinder international commerce, because these tend to deepen
a country's isolation. Montesquieu's other main example is the Roman Republic.
Here, he has access to much more thorough (and arguably
Finally, Montesquieu draws a distinction between interest in more accurate) knowledge through his extensive reading of
general and usury (excessive or illegal interest). The charging Roman historians. Thus, he can devote many more pages to
of some interest, Montesquieu says, must be permitted, or teasing out the republic's financial history. He tells mainly of
people will simply charge more to offset the risks of illegal the backfiring of policies designed to favor debtors or at least
lending. As a rule, he points out, nobody can be expected to to win their political support. These policies, to the extent they
lend money without some expectation of profit, which lenders were implemented, were popular because the credit structure
will seek either legally or illegally as their circumstances of Roman society was somewhat like that of modern countries.
require. To illustrate this, he tells of the rampant usury which There were many smaller debtors (think homeowners, car
arose in ancient Rome when lenders lost their trust in the owners, and credit-card holders) and a relatively few, relatively
republic's financial laws. wealthy creditors (today's big banks). The Romans, however,
pushed things too far—or so Montesquieu suggests. By making
it hard for creditors to reliably collect interest, he implies,
Analysis Roman legislators drove much of the republic's money-lending
activity underground.
As Montesquieu dips briefly into economics, he gives the
reader a sense of the fiscal issues then considered important
to Western European governments. Interestingly, Part 4, Book 23
Montesquieu's discussion anticipates—though loosely and
qualitatively—some of the conclusions reached by Adam Smith
in The Wealth of Nations (1776). That work is devoted wholly to
economics and thus naturally goes into much greater depth
Summary
than Montesquieu does here, but it echoes Montesquieu on
several points. Like Montesquieu, Smith takes great care to
explain to his readers that money is a commodity like anything
else and will obey the same laws of supply and demand. Like

daughter, Julia (39 BCE–14 CE), became the center of an

Book 23: On Laws in Their Relation to
adultery scandal, Augustus found himself forced to sentence
the Number of Inhabitants her to banishment.
Montesquieu now considers the role of the law in preventing Ancient legal history is a dry subject, and Montesquieu, though
either over- or underpopulation within a country. He cites the thorough, does not do much to liven it up. Those seeking a
examples of the ancient Greeks, who lived in small city-states more dramatic account of the laws, customs, and culture of
and wished to avoid overcrowding, and of the Romans, who early imperial Rome may be interested in Robert Graves's
were attempting to people a vast empire. In early imperial classic novel I, Claudius (1934). Written as a fictionalized
Rome, Montesquieu observes, there were many laws—some autobiography of Rome's fourth emperor, the book stays true
quite strict—encouraging marriage and childbearing. These to the broad historical facts while weaving a compelling
laws in effect rewarded a couple for each child they raised. narrative.
Later on, many of these laws were revoked, and the rise of
Christianity in Rome made celibacy culturally acceptable again.
Part 5, Books 24–25
Modern France, Montesquieu argues, is more like
underpopulated Rome than overpopulated Greece and should
fashion its laws accordingly. One option, he proposes, is to
ensure that everyone, even the poorest, has some land from
Summary
which to obtain a living and on which to raise a family. This is
preferable, in Montesquieu's view, to making the poor reliant on
a system of poorhouses that will only discourage them from
seeking employment. to the Religion Established in Each
Country, Examined in Respect to Its
Analysis Practices and Within Itself
The laws Montesquieu cites here are most commonly The first book of Part 5 involves the established religion of a
associated with Augustus (63 BCE–14 CE), the first emperor of nation, meaning the religion practiced by most of its
Rome. There were relatively few laws regulating marriage in inhabitants. This is not necessarily the same thing as a state
the republic, which preceded the Empire, but Augustus greatly religion, which receives special legal status. Montesquieu
multiplied the marriage laws and made them much more explains that even a "false" religion (which for him means
detailed in scope. These Augustan social laws imposed tax anything but Christianity) can have political benefits, and he
penalties on unmarried adults, gave out prizes to couples who reminds readers that he is a political philosopher, not a
bore many children, and severely punished adultery. theologian. He rejects the argument that it is better to be an
atheist than an idolater and suggests some boundaries
Augustus quickly found, however, that his subjects were
between religious law (e.g., canon law) and the civil law of a
unwilling to tolerate such extensive meddling in their household
nation. In general, he says, religion is a better tool for
affairs. They found one stratagem after another to evade the
correcting the private morals of the people, and civil law should
marriage laws—including engagements and divorces
not intervene in this regard if it can be helped.
undertaken purely for tax purposes. Augustus responded by
attempting to make the laws even stricter, but by 9 BCE, it was
clear this moral crusade was a lost cause, and the laws were
amended. Thus, what Montesquieu describes as the gradual
moral erosion of an empire was more like a short-lived, with the Establishment of the Religion of
aggressive reform followed by a return to business as usual.
Moreover, Augustus's own household was not exactly
compliant with the law's strict spirit. When the emperor's

Prior to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, France was

Each Country, and of Its External Police
peopled by a mixture of Christian Roman settlers and
Despite the similarity in title, Book 25 is broader in scope than polytheistic Germanic tribesmen. The spread of Christianity
Book 24: it deals with religion's role in shaping policy on a among the Germanic population proceeded by fits and starts,
national level. Questions considered here include the role of though it was helped somewhat by the highly publicized
missionaries and the desirability of converting conquered conversion of the Frankish king Clovis I (c. 466–511). By the
people to the religion of the conquering nation. People, time of Holy Roman emperor Charlemagne (c. 747–814), the
Montesquieu points out, are usually quite attached to their vast majority of the Franks were Christians, a situation that
religion, and any changes in doctrine or practice should be continued for centuries as the territory of Francia evolved into
undertaken with extreme caution. Montesquieu calls for limits France. Charlemagne, a patron of the Church, made it his
on the wealth and political power amassed by the express mission to Christianize not only his own subjects but
clergy—monks in particular—and tentatively advocates for the the people he conquered. His medieval successors continued
separation of church and state. his legacy: King Louis IX of France (1214–70), later canonized,
participated firsthand in multiple Crusades and passed
stringent anti-blasphemy laws at home.
Book 26: On the Laws in Relation They
With the outbreak of the Protestant Reformation in the early
Should Have with the Order of Things 16th century things changed drastically, as many splinter
groups split from the Catholic Church. Wars between Catholic
upon Which They Are to Enact
and Protestant neighbors often sprang up, but in some parts of
Europe, a compromise was quickly reached. In Germany the
Now Montesquieu segues into a fuller discussion of the
principle of cuius regio, eius religio—"whose realm, his
different mechanisms—religious, legal, and customary—that
religion"—meant that whoever controlled a territory could
regulate a population's behavior. Good governance, he implies,
dictate its religion. Because Germany at that time consisted of
boils down largely to choosing the right tool for the job. In
many small monarchies, this was a practical solution: rather
particular, Montesquieu calls for a clear and consistent
than remaining "prisoners of conscience" under a religiously
distinction between political rights (a citizen's rights with
adverse ruler, German Catholics could move to a neighboring
respect to the state) and civil rights (citizens' rights with
territory with a Catholic prince, and German Lutherans could
respect to each other). It is, for example, inappropriate for the
seek out a ruler who shared their views. This arrangement, in
state—as a political entity—to commandeer a citizen's property
place informally since the 1530s, became the law of the land in
and thereby violate his civil rights. Likewise, it is improper to
1555.
subject monarchical succession, which is a political concern, to
the same laws as the marriage and inheritance of commoners,
France, however, was not so lucky. In 1562 a massacre in the
whose household affairs are a civil issue at most.
French village of Wassy led to open war between the country's
Roman Catholics and the Huguenots (Reformed Church
Protestants). Thirty-six years later, with millions of lives lost, a
Analysis truce was reached via the Edict of Nantes (1598), which
guaranteed the Huguenots a measure of religious tolerance.
Montesquieu has a rather strong distaste for Catholic clergy,
Rebellions continued intermittently, and the edict was
repeatedly depicting "monastics" (monks and friars) and
ultimately revoked in 1685 by King Louis XIV (1638–1715),
"ecclesiastics" (churchmen in general) as greedy schemers
making Catholicism once more the state religion of France.
whose ambitions must be reined in. Despite this, Montesquieu
Under Louis XV (1710–74), however, the anti-Protestant laws
is very hesitant to recommend legal intervention of any kind
were only loosely enforced, at least among the wealthy and
into a country's religious culture. His reluctance in this regard is
influential. Montesquieu, whose wife was Protestant, wished to
easier to understand in light of France's own history of
see this tolerance become widespread and official, as it had
religious conflict: in urging rulers not to undermine an
been before. From a perspective of statecraft, however, he
established religion, Montesquieu is really counseling them to
understood that any "rocking of the boat" could have adverse
avoid a predictable cause of civil war.
consequences for a Catholic king.

Part 6, Books 27–29 Book 29: On the Way to Compose Laws

The real meat of the later books, however, is in Book 29, a
short how-to guide for legislators and other lawgivers. Laws,
Summary Montesquieu asserts, should be simple and direct, not bogged
down with qualifications and exceptions. They must be written
to reach people of "middling understanding," not couched in
Book 27: On the Origin and Revolutions complicated or flowery language. Nonetheless, he says, there
of the Roman Laws on Inheritance is such a thing as taking simplicity too far. The laws should not
try to create a rigid uniformity in all things, but should account
This short book surveys the history of inheritance law in Rome for differences in class or custom.
from the beginning of the republic onward. Montesquieu walks
the reader through the complexities of inheritance—particularly
the limits on female inheritance—up through the early Roman Analysis
Empire and then briefly remarks on the relaxation of these
limits under later emperors. Almost as important as the laws In Books 27 and 28 Montesquieu breaks away from his earlier
themselves are the various strategies people adopted to skirt broad focus on legal theory and drills down into some very
the laws. Some refused to be counted in the census (which narrow historical questions. He investigates such issues as the
would mean having their estate assessed), and others specific legal tactics the Romans took to evade this or that law
"bequeathed" their estate to eligible friends who promised to on inheritance, or the differences in ritual combat between two
pass it along to the deceased's daughter. neighboring Germanic tribes. Such fine-scaled analysis is not
completely absent from Books 1 through 26, but here—and in
the final two books—it appears with a vengeance.
Book 28: On the Origin and Revolutions
A few guideposts will give some shape to the discussion. The
of the Civil Laws among the French evolution of Roman inheritance law in Book 27 begins with the
Law of the Twelve Tables (451–450 BCE), which was the first
Montesquieu next presents a much longer survey of the history systematic codification of Roman law. The next important
of French law, beginning with the early-medieval conflict change was the Voconian Law (Lex Voconica, 169 BCE), which
between the Roman Empire and various Germanic tribes in the set a precise upper limit on the amount women could inherit.
region. He describes a continually changing patchwork quilt of This law prompted the various evasive tactics which
small regimes, with the Salian Franks and their Salic law Montesquieu reviews in such detail. The social laws passed
gradually becoming a preeminent force. Remarkably, laws in under Augustus, sometimes so strict in their efforts to
early medieval France were often personal rather than encourage marriage, actually improved the inheritance
territorial: a Frank would be judged by Frankish law and a prospects for women—provided they raised a family. The Lex
Burgundian by Burgundian law, regardless of where they lived. Papia Poppaea (9 CE), which Montesquieu calls the "Papian
As the Salian Franks and their descendants consolidated Law," allowed women to inherit if they had at least three
power and France began to unify, a code of law emerged children. Most of the developments Montesquieu introduced in
which blended aspects of Roman and Germanic traditions. this book are elaborations of, or reactions to, the Voconian
Montesquieu considers some such traditions—e.g., trial by Law.
combat—to be barbaric, even as he admires the spirit of
independence conferred by France's Germanic legal heritage. In Book 28 it is much easier to miss the forest for the trees. Of
He closes by mentioning the "great period" of the early 15th all the different tribes Montesquieu names—Burgundians,
century, when French law was codified into something like its Goths, Visigoths, and so forth—the ones to really keep an eye
early modern form. on are the Franks, from whom France gets its modern name.
There were two principal tribes of Franks, called the Ripuarians
and the Salians. The latter, led by Clovis I (c. 466–511) and his
descendants, consolidated their rule across much of present-

day France between the 5th and 7th centuries. In doing so,
Book 31: The Theory of the Feudal Laws
they paved the way for Francia's (i.e., France's) emergence as
a major European power. Their law, known as the Salic law, among the Franks in Their Relation to
remained a shaping influence on France's legal culture for
the Revolutions of Their Monarchy
many centuries.
Picking up where he left off in Book 30, Montesquieu examines

The Saint Louis whom Montesquieu mentions as a reformer of
the feudal structure of France under its early medieval rulers.
the French justice system is Louis XI (1214–70). Somewhat like
In part this book reiterates and expands Montesquieu's earlier
Augustus, he was a highly-respected monarch whose personal
observations about the laws of the Merovingians—those who
morality occasionally led to the enactment of rather drastic
ruled France from the 5th into the 8th century. From there
laws. Where Augustus offered prizes for childbearing, Saint
Montesquieu goes on to describe the "revolutions" (i.e.,
Louis instituted corporal punishments for blasphemy.
changes) in feudal law from the Merovingian to the Carolingian
era (the mid-8th to the late 9th century). He credits the
Part 6, Books 30–31 Carolingians—Charlemagne in particular—with bringing some

regularity to France's haphazard collection of military, judicial,
and territorial jurisdictions.
Summary In the last chapters of the book Montesquieu describes

changes in the feudal system that led many Franks to become,
in effect, free agents. No longer bound to the king, they could
Book 30: The Theory of the Feudal choose a local lord to whom they could pledge their fealty.
This, in Montesquieu's view, is the main cause of the
Laws among the Franks in Their weakening of Charlemagne's empire. After a few pages on the
Relation with the Establishment of the fate of France after the Carolingians, Montesquieu brings his
treatise to an abrupt close.
Monarchy
Montesquieu now attempts a deeper dive into the pre-modern
Analysis
history of France. He describes the establishment of a
Germanic legal code throughout the region, with several
Here, as elsewhere in Part 6, a modern reader is likely to be
features unusual by modern standards. For one thing the
hampered by the lack of dates and the overabundance of
feudal law among the Franks (the medieval rulers of France)
personal names. Montesquieu, following the practice of his
was a patchwork quilt of many autonomous fiefs and
time, does not even refer to the Merovingian, Carolingian, and
bishoprics. The lords and bishops who governed these areas
Capetian dynasties as such. He calls them, instead, the "first
conducted their own judiciary proceedings, with little or no
race," the "second race," and the "third race" of kings. Modern
interference from the king. Another Germanic custom found in
English editions tend to use the dynastic names instead.
medieval French law is the notion of paying a fine to the person
one has harmed, rather than suffering corporal punishment or To get the gist of Montesquieu's argument, however, it is not
imprisonment. These payments, called settlements, were the necessary to track down the identity of every king, bishop, and
prescribed punishment for offenses from theft all the way up scholar mentioned in these books. (A modern critical edition,
to murder. Among the Franks only treason and cowardice were such as the Cohler/Miller/Stone edition of 1989, will provide
regularly regarded as capital crimes. Throughout this long this level of detail for those who need it.) Instead, it helps to
book Montesquieu attempts to correct the misconceptions of think in terms of the three overarching dynasties of medieval
his contemporaries about how such a legal system functioned; France. The Merovingians (5th to 8th century) were the first
he repeatedly warns against attempting to apply 18th-century Frankish rulers to impose some overarching order on the
notions of law to the Middle Ages. region, which until then had been a checkerboard of small
monarchies and fiefs. The dynasty's name comes from the

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Quotes 27
Frankish warlord Merovech (5th century), but Clovis (466–511

CE), Merovec's grandson, is generally reckoned as the first g Quotes
Merovingian king. Assuming the throne as a teenager, Clovis
proceeded to drive the Romans out of Gaul, a region roughly
coterminous with modern France, and to secure the region "The intelligent world is far from
against other Germanic tribes. As Montesquieu relates, later
being as well governed as the
Merovingian rulers were often little more than referees
attempting to rein in the conflict among the various noblemen. physical world."
Still, the Merovingians resisted conquest from outside, and the
dynasty continued for over two centuries. — Montesquieu, Part 1, Book 1
Most of Book 31, however, is devoted to the Carolingians,

whose rule began in 751 with the overthrow of Childeric III (d. Montesquieu (1689–1755) spends much of Book 1 developing a
755) and the installation of Pippin III (c. 714–68) in his place. contrast between God, the divine Lawgiver, and human
Prior to Pippin's coronation (Montesquieu calls him Pepin, lawmakers. In the physical world, which for Montesquieu
which is the French form of the name), the Merovingian leaders includes not only physics but also biology, God has established
had served as "mayors of the palace"—a sort of adviser and fixed rules that will endure until the end of time. Humans, in
military leader whose responsibilities also included overseeing creating laws for their societies, cannot do this, for two
the royal household. By the time of Frankish ruler Pippin II (d. reasons. First, lacking divine wisdom, they cannot identify the
714) and his illegitimate son Charles Martel (c. 688–741) gained best laws in advance. Second, the circumstances addressed
the mayoralty, holders of the office had become the real power by human laws are constantly changing, and the laws
behind the throne, and the Merovingian kings had been themselves must change too.
reduced almost to a figurehead status. Montesquieu calls
Pippin III, Charles's son, Pippin "the King" to distinguish him
from his non-royal grandfather, but he is known today as Pippin "There are three kinds of
II or Pippin the Short.
government: republican,
The Carolingian dynasty reached its height under
Charlemagne (c. 747–814), who consolidated political power in
monarchical, and despotic."
Western Europe to an extent not seen since the fall of the
Western Roman Empire. Montesquieu, a great admirer of — Montesquieu, Part 1, Book 2
Charlemagne, blames the subsequent decline of the
Carolingian dynasty on his successor Louis I (778–840), whom One of the most famous concepts from The Spirit of the Laws
Montesquieu calls Louis the Pious and who partitioned the is its division of governments into three major kinds. These
realm among four of his sons in the hope of quelling civil war. categories are not as rigid or simplistic as they may seem
These sons and their descendants, in Montesquieu's judgment, when Montesquieu first states them. Rather, he provides plenty
largely continued the process of giving the empire away of instances in which a regime transitions from one form of
piecemeal, laying the groundwork for another regime change in government to another. He also cites a few hybrid systems in
987. In that year Hugh Capet (938–96) was crowned as the which monarchical and republican principles exist side by side.
founding monarch of the Capetian dynasty, which lasted
through 13 of his direct descendants until 1328; Montesquieu's
narrative, however, essentially ends with Hugh's accession.
"Not many laws are needed for
timid, ignorant, beaten-down
people."
— Montesquieu, Part 1, Book 5

The drawbacks of living in a sophisticated legal culture are, for For a government to fall into despotism, however, is always a
Montesquieu, the price paid for a moderate government. A tragedy.
complex legal code is necessary in a republic or a monarchy,
where citizens (or subjects) have rights to defend and interests
to protect. In a despotic regime the laws can be simple "No word has received more
because there are, frankly, no real rights to protect. Later, in
Part 2, Book 13, he makes the same point about taxes: heavy different significations and has
taxation is accepted only by a populace who consider
struck minds in so many ways as
themselves free in other respects.
has liberty."
"The corruption of each — Montesquieu, Part 2, Book 11
government almost always begins

This quote precedes a list of examples showing how different
with that of its principles." peoples have defined liberty. Some associate it with a
monarchy and others with a republic; some with freedom of
— Montesquieu, Part 1, Book 8 religion, others with freedom in dress and manners. Despite
the seemingly contradictory nature of the examples, it would
be a mistake to assume Montesquieu is being merely cynical
Throughout Part 1 Montesquieu is concerned not with
here. He asks What is freedom? not to deny that freedom can
describing only the different types of government but with
exist but to show that freedom is at least partly context-
deducing their principles. A principle in this sense is the core
dependent.
value that the government must impart to its citizens or
subjects in order to keep functioning. Montesquieu likens these
principles in importance to the spring of a watch or clock: a
belief in honor, for example, does not merely preserve a "It can happen that the
monarchy but keeps it moving. Thus, if people in a monarchy
constitution is free and that the
are robbed of the chance to act honorably, the state will
become corrupt. citizen is not."

"It is not a drawback when a state
passes from a moderate Political freedom, Montesquieu acknowledges, requires more
than just a "moderate" form of government. A monarchy, or
government to moderate even a republic, can be "unfree" from a citizen's perspective if
government." its laws are too restrictive. Montesquieu also considers the
opposite case: a nominally despotic regime where law or
custom gives the citizens a good deal of breathing room. His
overriding point here, repeated in various ways throughout the
treatise, is that political freedom must be carefully preserved
Beneath the three-part division of "republic, monarchy, by sound legislation, never taken for granted.
despotism," Montesquieu makes an even more fundamental
distinction between a moderate regime and a despotic one.
Though he writes for the subjects of a monarchy, he also finds "As mechanics has its frictions
many virtues to praise in republican governments, such as that
in the Netherlands. If a republic becomes a monarchy or vice which often change or check its
versa, he says, nothing of great importance is necessarily lost.

theoretical effects, politics, too, "The well-being of the people is

has its frictions." the supreme law."
— Montesquieu, Part 3, Book 17 — Montesquieu, Part 5, Book 26
Here, Montesquieu indulges in the idea of politics as a science This statement both encapsulates and transcends
like physics. In some parts of the treatise this "mechanistic" Montesquieu's thinking about all the different laws, mores, and
view of politics can come across as simplistic, as when manners that shape a society. A wise legislator, he argues
Montesquieu cites climate as a universal influence on human throughout his treatise, will make laws that do not need to be
character. The allusion to "friction" is Montesquieu's way of broken often because they are well suited to the spirit of the
acknowledging the gap between the theories he generates populace. Even so, Montesquieu admits, cases will inevitably
and the real-world phenomena he observes. arise in which the letter of the law seems to contradict its spirit.
When this happens, it becomes necessary to consult a higher
law by asking what is best for the people.
"A free nation can have a liberator;
a subjugated nation can have only "The statutes of legislators regard
another oppressor." the society more than the citizen,
— Montesquieu, Part 3, Book 19 and the citizen more than the
man."
It's not enough, Montesquieu argues in this chapter, to change
the ruler or even the constitution of a country. Rather, he — Montesquieu, Part 6, Book 27
believes, freedom can take root only in a nation whose mores,
manners, religion, and even climate are hospitable to personal
Throughout The Spirit of the Laws Montesquieu calls for
liberty. A "free nation" in this sense is one that is deeply
moderation in lawmaking. He is particularly troubled by laws
predisposed to freedom, even if it temporarily suffers from an
that seem to ignore the natural feelings or inclinations of the
oppressive regime.
citizen. Such inflexibility—whether in laws concerning religion,
those addressing public morals, or those regulating
inheritance—is an imperfection, according to Montesquieu's
"Silver is the sign of values." way of thinking.
"The political good, like the moral

Though he does not spend much time on economics,
good, is always found between
Montesquieu has some sophisticated insights about monetary
policy. One enduring contribution is his recognition of money's two limits."
dual status as a sign and a commodity. As a sign money is
sometimes amenable to such tactics as debasement or an — Montesquieu, Part 6, Book 29
alteration in the exchange rate. As a commodity, however,
silver obeys the same rules of supply and demand as iron,
Here again Montesquieu voices his favored theme of
grain, or wool.
moderation. Some degree of legal formality and sophistication
is necessary for a society to function, but too complex a legal

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Glossary 30
system will only burden the citizenry. A too lenient penal code
will fail to deter crime, but there is nothing to be gained from m Glossary
excessive cruelty, either. Montesquieu rejects any legal code in
which "excess" is seen as good. aristocracy system of government in which an elite group,
distinguished by wealth or ancestry, have control. Montesquieu
regards aristocracies as a type of republic.
"When one examines the records
body politic the people of a society, regarded as a group. The
of our history and our laws, it term is similar to "population" or "citizenry" but emphasizes the
political nature of the group.
seems that everything is a sea and
constitution set fundamental principles underlying a country's
that the sea lacks even shores."
laws. Most modern democracies embody these principles in a
written constitution, but a constitution can also be a set of
— Montesquieu, Part 6, Book 30 customs or traditions understood to be legally binding.
democracy system of government in which the people,

The history of law, Montesquieu admits, is a dry and
including the common people, have a say. Montesquieu
sometimes disorienting subject. Legal texts—particularly
distinguishes a democracy from an aristocracy but considers
ancient and medieval ones—are full of obscure terms and
each to be a kind of republic.
complicated phraseology. Usually, Montesquieu is resourceful
in bringing together the evidence to say something concrete despot absolute ruler, especially a cruel or tyrannical one.
about the legal practices of a given time and place. Every once Montesquieu helped to popularize the word despot in both
in a while, however, he seems to give in to the urge to throw up French and English.
his hands in frustration.
despotism system of government with a single ruler whose will
is, in effect, the law. Montesquieu distinguishes despotism from
"History must be illuminated by monarchy by the extent of the power held by the ruler.
laws, and laws by history." executive power power to carry out (execute) the law, and in
some specific cases to override it. This power is held by the
— Montesquieu, Part 6, Book 31 executive branch in modern democracies.
judicial power power to interpret and enforce the laws and to

Throughout The Spirit of the Laws but especially in the latter evaluate their application to individual cases. The judiciary
books Montesquieu is engaged in trying to get a coherent branch, which includes the court system, holds this power in
story out of disparate and sometimes contradictory texts. modern democracies.
Occasionally, he finds it unclear which monarch promulgated a
particular law, since dynastic rulers often used the same name law of nations old-fashioned term for what is now called
as their ancestors. To resolve such issues, he says, it is international law. The law of nations governs the rights and
necessary to look at the overall history of the country in relationships of countries in both war and peace.
question. Laws respecting the Church, for example, are likely

legislative power power to make laws. This power is held by
the work of a Christian ruler, not his polytheistic ancestor.
the legislative branch, represented in modern times by such
bodies as the United States Congress or the British Parliament.
monarchy system of government with a single ruler who is

subject to the laws. In Montesquieu's system monarchy is
distinct from despotism because a monarch does not rule
absolutely.

The Spirit of the Laws Study Guide Glossary 31
mores basic customs and norms of a culture. Montesquieu

treats mores as less strictly binding than a society's laws but
more substantial than its manners.
natural law set of fundamental moral rules that are "natural" to

human behavior. Montesquieu contrasts natural law with
positive law in the opening books of the text.
positive law set of specific, human-made laws created by legal

institutions. Montesquieu contrasts positive law with natural
law in the first few books of his work then focuses mainly on
the former.
republic system in which the people are represented by

elected officials. Montesquieu uses the word a little differently
from its modern meaning: by his definition, a country with a
king or queen can be a republic if the real power rests with a
publicly elected body.
All material contained within this document/guide is protected by copyright law of the US and various other
jurisdictions and may not be reproduced or distributed without the express written consent. Contact Course Hero
with respect to reproduction or distribution. This document was downloaded from Coursehero.com on
09-09-2021 by 100000816543518.

The Spirit of The Laws: What's Inside

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Spirit of The Laws: What's Inside

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Spirit of The Laws: What's Inside

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Spirit of the

also makes a strong historical case for the doctrine of

h Key Figures ................................................................................................. 6 ABOUT THE TITLE

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

An even more fundamental idea, one to which Montesquieu

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

leadership. and sets boundaries on the activities of each.

In the subsequent debate over the Constitution's ratification,

Laws Montesquieu's treatise. The former argued that the

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

read extensively as preparation for his planned masterpiece,

Literary Accomplishments Montesquieu

In the 1730s Montesquieu wrote much but published little. He

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Clovis I (c. 466–511) was the founder

Elizabeth I (1533–1603) was the queen

Augustus (63 BCE–14 CE), also known

Charles Bonnet (1720–93) was a Louis I (778–840), whom Montesquieu

Louis XIV, also called the Sun King

Louis XV (1710–74) was the great-

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Philip VI (1293–1350) was the first

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

these nations, from ancient Greece to modern Spain, have

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

conclusion, Montesquieu offers some abstract advice on "the

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

c Part Summaries Analysis

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Part 1, Books 6–7

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

"restraint" on women's behavior, he argues, is characteristic of

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

competition. legacy of Macedonian king Alexander the Great (356–23 BCE),

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Part 2, Books 11–12 Analysis

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

abolish the sale or "farming out" of all government offices. In

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

It should be remembered, however, that Montesquieu was

It's worth noting, too, that Montesquieu's

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Summary the absence of Christianity as a cultural force. Meanwhile in

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Commerce, Considered in the Because trade is so closely connected to the prosperity of

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

daughter, Julia (39 BCE–14 CE), became the center of an

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Prior to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, France was

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Part 6, Books 27–29 Book 29: On the Way to Compose Laws

Copyright © 2021 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 09-09-2021 by 100000816543518

Picking up where he left off in Book 30, Montesquieu examines

Part 6, Books 30–31 Carolingians—Charlemagne in particular—with bringing some

Summary In the last chapters of the book Montesquieu describes