Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron of Montesquieu (1689–1755), was one of the leading figures of the early Enlightenment. In Persian Letters, he offered a kind of reverse travel account in which fictional Persians comment on what they see in France. Politics, religion, and social customs all came under critical scrutiny. Letter 37 points to one of his and other early Enlightenment authors’ main targets: the French king, Louis XIV (r. 1643–1715), and his absolutist state. Written by one of the book’s two main characters, a Persian named Usbek, to a friend back home, the letter explicitly criticizes the king’s vanity, ostentation, and life at court. The letter implicitly passes even more serious judgment on the aging ruler in noting his esteem for “oriental policies.” Montesquieu condemns these same policies elsewhere in his letters as inhumane and unjust.
The King of France is old. We have no examples in our histories of such a long reign as his. It is said that he possesses in a very high degree the faculty of making himself obeyed: he governs with equal ability his family, his court, and his kingdom: he has often been heard to say, that, of all existing governments, that of the Turks, or that of our august Sultan, pleased him best: such is his high opinion of Oriental statecraft.1
I have studied his character, and I have found certain contradictions which I cannot reconcile. For example, he has a minister who is only eighteen years old,2 and a mistress [Madame de Maintenon] who is fourscore; he loves his religion, and yet he cannot abide those [the Jansenists] who assert that it ought to be strictly observed; although he flies from the noise of cities, and is inclined to be reticent, from morning till night he is engaged in getting himself talked about; he is fond of trophies and victories, but he has as great a dread of seeing a good general at the head of his own troops, as at the head of an army of his enemies. It has never I believe happened to anyone but himself, to be burdened with more wealth than even a prince could hope for, and yet at the same time steeped in such poverty as a private person could ill brook.
He delights to reward those who serve him; but he pays as liberally the assiduous indolence of his courtiers, as the labors in the field of his captains; often the man who undresses him, or who hands him his serviette at table, is preferred before him who has taken cities and gained battles; he does not believe that the greatness of a monarch is compatible with restriction in the distribution of favors; and, without examining into the merit of a man, he will heap benefits upon him, believing that his selection makes the recipient worthy; accordingly, he has been known to bestow a small pension upon a man who had run off two leagues from the enemy, and a good government on another who had gone four.
Paris, the 7th of the moon of Maharram, 1713.
Source: Montesquieu, Persian Letters, trans. John Davidson (London: Privately printed, 1892), 1:85–86.
Question to Consider
In the commentary of the fictional character of Usbek in this letter, in what ways is Montesquieu criticizing both Louis XIV’s personal style and absolutism in general?