第1章

ByCharlesdeSecondat，BarondeMontesquieuTranslatedbyThomasNugent，revisedbyJ。V。PrichardTheTranslatortotheReaderbyThomasNugent1752

Thefollowingworkmaywiththestrictestjusticebesaidtohavedonehonourtohumannatureaswellastothegreatabilitiesoftheauthor。

Thewisestandmostlearnedman，andthosemostdistinguishedbybirthandtheelevationoftheirstations，have，ineverycountryinEurope，considereditasamostexcellentperformance。Andmaywebepermittedtoadd，thatasovereignprince[1]asjustlycelebratedforhisprobityandgoodsense，asforhispoliticalandmilitaryskill，hasdeclaredthatfromM。deMontesquieuhehaslearnttheartofgovernment。Buthadtheillustriousauthorreceivednosuchdistinguishedhonour，thenumerouseditionsofthisworkinFrench，andtheirsuddenspreadingthroughallEurope，areasufficienttestimonyofthehighesteemwithwhichithasbeenreceivedbythepublic。

Butnotwithstandingthedeservedapplausewhichhasbeensoliberallybestowedontheauthor，therehavebeensomewhohavenotonlyendeavouredtoblasthislaurels，buthavetreatedhimwithallthatscurrilitywhichbigotryandsuperstitionareapt，oneveryoccasion，tothrowoutagainsttruth，reasonandgoodsense。TheseM。deMontesquieuhashimselfanswered，inaseparatetreatiseintitled，ADefenseoftheSpiritofLaws，fromwhencewehavethoughtpropertoextract，forthesakeofsuchashavenotseenthattreatise，theprincipalofthoseobjections，andthesubstanceofwhathasbeengiveninreply：Onlyfirstobserving，thatthisdefenseisdividedintothreeparts，inthefirstofwhichheanswersthegeneralreproachesthathavebeenthrownoutagainsthim；inthesecondherepliestoparticularreproaches；andinthethird，hegivessomereflectionsonthemannerinwhichhisworkhasbeencriticized。

TheauthorfirstcomplainsofhisbeingchargedbothwithespousingthedoctrinesofSpinoza，andwithbeingaDeist，twoopinionsdirectlycontradictorytoeachother。Totheformeroftheseheanswers，byplacinginoneviewtheseveralpassagesintheSpiritofLawsdirectlylevelledagainstthedoctrinesofSpinoza；andthenherepliestotheobjectionsthathavebeenmadetothosepassages，uponwhichthisinjuriouschargeisfounded。

Thecriticassertsthatourauthorstumblesathisfirstsettingout，andisoffendedathissaying，thatLawsintheirmostextensivesignification，arethenecessaryrelationsderivedfromthenatureofthings。Tothishereplies，thatthecritichadhearditsaidthatSpinozahadmaintainedthattheworldwasgovernedbyablindandnecessaryprinciple；andfromhenceonseeingthewordnecessary，heconcludesthatthismustbeSpinozism；tho’whatismostsurprising，thisarticleisdirectlylevelledatthedangerousprinciplesmaintainedbySpinoza：ThathehadHobbes’ssysteminhiseye，asystem，which，asitmakesallthevirtuesandvicesdependontheestablishmentofhumanlaws，andasitwouldprovethatmenwereborninastateofwar，andthatthefirstlawofnatureisawarofallagainstall，overturns，likeSpinoza，allreligion，andallmorality。Hencehelaiddownthisposition，thattherewerelawsofjusticeandequitybeforetheestablishmentofpositivelaws：hencealsohehasprovedthatallbeingshadlaws；thatevenbeforetheircreationtheyhadpossiblelaws；andthatGodhimselfhadlaws，thatis，thelawswhichhehimselfhadmade。

Hehasshewn[2]thatnothingcanbemorefalsethantheassertionthatmenwereborninastateofwar；andhehasmadeitappearthatwarsdidnotcommencetillaftertheestablishmentofsociety。Hisprinciplesarehereextremelyclear；fromwhenceitfollows，thatashehasattackedHobbes’serrors，hehasconsequentlythoseofSpinoza；andhehasbeensolittleunderstood，thattheyhavetakenfortheopinionsofSpinoza，thoseveryobjectionswhichweremadeagainstSpinozism。

Again，theauthorhassaidthatthecreationwhichappearstobeanarbitraryact，supposeslawsasinvariableasthefatalityoftheAtheists。FromthesewordsthecriticconcludesthattheauthoradmitsthefatalityoftheAtheists。

Tothisheanswers，thathehadjustbeforedestroyedthisfatality，byrepresentingitasthegreatestabsurditytosupposethatablindfatalitywascapableofproducingintelligentbeings。Besides，inthepassageherecensured，hecanonlybemadetosaywhathereallydoessay：hedoesnotspeakofcauses，nordoeshecomparecauses；buthespeaksofeffectsandcompareseffects。Thewholearticle，whatgoesbeforeandwhatfollows，makeitevident，thatthereisnothinghereintendedbutthelawsofmotion，which，accordingtotheauthor，hadbeenestablishedbyGod：theselawsareinvariable；thisheasasserted，andallnaturalphilosophyhasassertedthesamething；theyareinvariablebecauseGodhasbeenpleasedtomakethemso，andbecausehehaspleasedtopreservetheworld。Whentheauthorthereforesaysthatthecreationwhichappearstobeanarbitraryact，supposeslawsasinvariableasthefatalityoftheAtheists，hecannotbeunderstoodtosaythatthecreationwasanecessaryactlikethefatalityoftheAtheists。

HavingvindicatedhimselffromthechargeofSpinozism，heproceedstotheotheraccusation，andfromamultitudeofpassagescollectedtogetherprovesthathehasnotonlyacknowledgedthetruthofrevealedreligion；butthatheisinlovewithChristianity，andendeavourstomakeitappearamiableintheeyesofothers。Hethenenquiresintowhathisadversarieshavesaidtoprovethecontrary，observingthattheproofsoughttobearsomeproportiontotheaccusation；thatthisaccusationisnotofafrivolousnature，andthattheproofsthereforeoughtnottobefrivolous。

Thefirstobjectionis，thathehaspraisedtheStoics，whoadmittedablindfatality，andthatthisisthefoundationofnaturalreligion。Tothishereplies，\"Iwillforamomentsupposethatthisfalsemannerofreasoninghassomeweight：hastheauthorpraisedthephilosophyandmetaphysicsoftheStoics？Hehaspraisedtheirmorals，andhassaidthatthepeoplereapedgreatbenefitfromthem：hehassaidthis，andhehassaidnomore：Iammistaken，hehassaidmore，hehasatthebeginningofhisbookattackedthisfatality，hedoesnotthenpraiseit，whenhepraisestheStoics。\"

Thesecondobjectionis，thathehaspraisedBayle，incallinghimagreatman。Tothisheanswers，\"ItistruethattheauthorhascalledBayleagreatman，buthehascensuredhisopinions：ifhehascensuredthem，hehasnotespousedthem：andsincehehascensuredhisopinions，hedoesnotcallhimagreatmanbecauseofhisopinions。EverybodyknowsthatBaylehadagreatgeniuswhichheabused；butthisgeniuswhichheabused，hehad：theauthorhasattackedhissophisms，andpitieshimonaccountofhiserrors。Idon’tlovethemenwhosubvertthelawsoftheircountry；butIshouldfindgreatdifficultyinbelievingthatCaesarandCromwellhadlittleminds：Iamnotinlovewithconquerors，butitwouldbeverydifficulttopersuademetobelievethatAlexanderandJenghiz—Khanweremenofonlyacommongenius。Besides，Ihaveremarked，thatthedeclamationsofangrymenmakebutlittleimpressiononanyexceptthosewhoareangry：thegreatestpartofthereadersaremenofmoderation，andseldomtakeupabookbutwhentheyareincoolblood；forrationalandsensiblemenlovereason。HadtheauthorloadedBaylewithathousandinjuriousreproaches，itwouldnothavefollowedfromthence，thatBaylehadreasonedwellorill；allthathisreaderswouldhavebeenabletoconcludefromitwouldhavebeen，thattheauthorknewhowtobeabusive。\"

Thethirdobjectionis，thathehasnotinhisfirstchapterspokenoforiginalsin。Towhichhereplies：\"Iaskeverysensiblemanifthischapterisatreatiseofdivinity？iftheauthorhadspokenoforiginalsin，theymighthaveimputedittohimasacrimethathehadnotspokenofredemption。\"

Thenextobjectiontakesnotice，that\"TheauthorhassaidthatinEnglandself—murderistheeffectofadistemper，andthatitcannotbepunishedwithoutpunishingtheeffectsofmadness；theconsequencethecriticdrawsfromthenceis，thatafollowerofnaturalreligioncanneverforgetthatEnglandisthecradleofhissect，andthatherubsaspongeoverallthecrimeshefoundthere。\"Hereplies，\"TheauthordoesnotknowthatEnglandisthecradleofnaturalreligion；butheknowsthatEnglandwasnothiscradle。HeisnotofthesamereligioussentimentsasanEnglishman，anymorethananEnglishmanwhospeaksofthephysicaleffectshefoundinFrance，isnotofthesamereligionastheFrench。Heisnotafollowerofnaturalreligion；buthewishesthathiscriticwasafollowerofnaturallogic。\"

Thesearetheprincipleobjectionslevelledagainstourauthor，onthishead，fromwhichourreaderswillsufficientlyseeonwhattrifling，whatpuerileargumentsthischargeofDeismisfounded。Heconcludeshoweverthisarticle，withadefenseofthereligionofnature，andsuchadefenseaseveryrationalChristianmustundoubtedlyapprove。

\"BeforeIconcludethisfirstpart，Iamtemptedtomakeoneobjectionagainsthimwhohasmadesomany；buthehassostunnedmyearswiththewordsfollowerofnaturalreligion，thatIscarcelydarepronouncethem。

Ishallendeavourhowevertotakecourage。Donotthecritic’stwopiecesstandingreaterneedofanexplication，thanthatwhichI

defend？Doeshedowell，whilespeakingofnaturalreligionandrevelation，tofallperpetuallyupononesideofthesubject，andtolosealltracesoftheother？Doeshedowellnevertodistinguishthosewhoacknowledgeonlythereligionofnature，fromthosewhoacknowledgebothnaturalandrevealedreligion？Doeshedowelltoturnfranticwhenevertheauthorconsidersmaninthestateofnaturalreligion，andwheneverheexplainsanythingontheprinciplesofnaturalreligion？

DoeshedowelltoconfoundnaturalreligionwithAtheism？HaveInotheardthatwehaveallnaturalreligion？HaveInotheardthatChristianityistheperfectionofnaturalreligion？HaveInotheardthatnaturalreligionisemployedtoprovethetruthofrevelationagainsttheDeists？andthatthesamenaturalreligionisemployedtoprovetheexistenceofaGodagainsttheAtheists？HehassaidthattheStoicswerethefollowersofnaturalreligion；andIsay，thattheywereAtheists，sincetheybelievedthatablindfatalitygovernedtheuniverse；anditisbythereligionofnaturethatweoughttoattackthatoftheStoics。HesaysthattheschemeofnaturalreligionisconnectedwiththatofSpinoza；andIsay，thattheyarecontradictorytoeachother，anditisbynaturalreligionthatweoughttodestroySpinoza’sscheme。Isay，thattoconfoundnaturalreligionwithAtheism，istoconfoundtheproofwiththethingtobeproved，andtheobjectionsagainsterrorwitherroritself，andthatthisistotakeawaythemostpowerfularmswehaveagainstthiserror。\"

Theauthornowproceedstothesecondpartofhisdefence，inwhichhehasthefollowingremarks。\"Whathasthecriticdonetogiveanamplescopetohisdeclamations，andtoopenthewidestdoortoinvectives？hehasconsideredtheauthor，asifhehadintendedtofollowtheexampleofM。Abbadye，andhadbeenwritingatreatiseontheChristianreligion：hehasattackedhim，asifhistwobooksonreligionweretwotreatisesondivinity；hehascavilledagainsthim，asifwhilehehadbeentalkingofanyreligionwhatsoeverwhichwasnotChristian，heshouldhaveexamineditaccordingtotheprinciples，anddoctrinesofChristianity；hehasjudgedhimasifinhistwobooksrelatingtoreligionheoughttohavepreachedtoMahometansandIdolatorsthedoctrinesofChristianity。Wheneverhehasspokenofreligioningeneral，wheneverhehasmadeuseofthewordreligion，thecriticsays，’thatistheChristianreligion’；wheneverhehascomparedthereligiousritesofdifferentnationsandhassaidthattheyaremoreconformabletothepoliticalgovernmentofthesecountries，thansomeotherrites，thecriticagainsays，’youapprovethemthenandabandontheChristianfaith’：whenhehasspokenofapeoplewhohaveneverembracedChristianity，orwhohavelivedbeforeChrist，againsaysthecritic，’youdon’tthenacknowledgethemoralsofChristianity’；whenhehascanvassedanycustomwhatsoever，whichhehasfoundinapoliticalwriter，thecriticaskshim，’IsthisadoctrineofChristianity？’Hemightaswelladd，’Yousayyouareacivilian，andIwillmakeyouadivineinspiteofyourself：youhavegivenuselsewheresomeveryexcellentthingsontheChristianreligion，butthiswasonlytoconcealyourrealsentiments，forIknowyourheart，andpenetrateintoyourthoughts。ItistrueIdonotunderstandyourbook，noritismaterialthatIshoulddiscoverthegoodorbaddesignwithwhichithasbeenwritten；butIknowthebottomofallyourthoughts：Idon’tknowawordofwhatyouhavesaid，butIunderstandperfectlywell，whatyouhavenotsaid。’\"

Buttoproceed。Theauthorhasmaintainedthepolygamyisnecessarilyandinitsownnaturebad；hehaswroteachapterexpresslyagainstit，andafterwardshasexaminedinaphilosophicalmanner，inwhatcountries，inwhatclimates，orinwhatcircumstancesitisleastpernicious；hehascomparedclimateswithclimates，andcountrieswithcountries，andhasfound，thattherearecountries，whereitseffectsarelessperniciousthaninothers；because，accordingtotheaccountsthathavebeengivenofthem，thenumberofmenandwomennotbeingeverywhereequal，itisevident，thatifthereareplaceswheretherearemorewomenthanmen，polygamy，badasitisinitself，istherelessperniciousthaninothers。Butasthetitleofthischapter[3]containsthesewords，Thatthelawofpolygamyisanaffairofcalculation，theyhaveseizedthistitleasanexcellentsubjectfordeclamation。Havingrepeatedthechapteritself，againstwhichnoobjectionismade，heproceedstojustifythetitleandadds：\"Polygamyisanaffairofcalculationwhenwewouldknow，ifitismoreorlessperniciousincertainclimates，incertaincountries，incertaincircumstancesthaninothers；itisnotanaffairofcalculationwhenwewoulddecidewhetheritbegoodorbadinitself。Itisnotanaffairofcalculationwhenwereasononitsnature；itmaybeanaffairofcalculationwhenwecombineitseffects；inshort，itisneveranaffairofcalculationwhenweenquireintotheendofmarriage，anditisevenlessso，whenweenquireintomarriageasalawestablishedandconfirmedbyJesusChrist。\"

Again，theauthorhavingsaid，that[4]polygamyismoreconformabletonatureinsomecountriesthaninothers，thecritichasseizedthewordsmoreconformabletonature，tomakehissay，thatheapprovespolygamy。

Towhichheanswers，\"IfIsay，thatIshouldlikebettertohaveafeverthanthescurvy，doesthissignifythatIshouldliketohaveafever？oronlythatthescurvyismoredisagreeabletomethanafever？\"

Havingfinishedhisreplytowhathadbeenobjectedtoonthesubjectofpolygamy，hevindicatesthatexcellentpartofhisworkwhichtreatsoftheclimates；whenspeakingoftheinfluencethesehaveuponreligion，hesays，\"Iamverysensiblethatreligionisinitsownnatureindependentofallphysicalcauseswhatsoever，thatthereligionwhichisgoodinonecountryisgoodinanother，andthatitcannotbeperniciousinonecountrywithoutbeingsoinall；butyet，Isay，thatasitispracticedbymen，andhasarelationtothosewhodonotpracticeit，anyreligionwhatsoeverwillfindagreaterfacilityinbeingpracticed，eitherinthewholeorinpart，incertaincircumstancesthaninothers，andthatwhoeversaysthecontrarymustrenounceallpretensionstosenseandunderstanding。\"

Butthecritichasbeengreatlyoffendedbyourauthor’ssaying，[5]

thatwhenastateisatlibertytoreceiveortorejectanewreligion，itoughttoberejected；whenitisreceived，itoughttobetolerated。

Fromhenceheobjects，thattheauthorhasadvisedidolatrousprinces，nottoadmittheChristianreligionintotheirdominions。Tothisheanswersfirstbyreferringtoapassageinwhichhesays，[6]thatthebestcivilandpoliticallawsare，nexttoChristianity，thegreatestblessingsthatmencangiveorreceive；andadds，\"IfthenChristianityisthefirstandgreatestblessing，andthepoliticalandcivillawsthesecond，therearenopoliticalorcivillawsinanystatethatcanoroughttohindertheentranceoftheChristianreligion。\"

Hissecondansweris，\"Thatthereligionofheavenisnotestablishedbythesamemethodsasthereligionsoftheearth；readthehistoryofthechurch，andyouwillseethewondersperformedbytheChristianreligion：wasshetoenteracountry，sheknewhowtoopenitsgates；

everyinstrumentwasabletoeffectit；atonetimeGodmakesuseofafewfisherman，atanotherhesetsanemperoronthethrone，andmakeshimbowdownhisheadundertheyolkofthegospel。DoesChristianityhideherselfinsubterraneancaverns？stayamoment，andyouseeanadvocatespeakingfromtheimperialthroneonherbehalf。Shetraverses，whenevershepleases，seas，rivers，andmountains；noobstaclesherebelowcanstopherprogress：implantaversioninthemind，shewillconquerthisaversion：establishcustoms，formhabits，publishedicts，enactlaws，shewilltriumphovertheclimate，overthelawswhichresultfromit，andoverthelegislatorswhohavemadethem。Godactingaccordingtodecreeswhichareunknowntous，extendsorcontractsthelimitsofhisreligion。\"

______

1。ThepresentKindofSardinia。

2。Booki。Chap。1。

3。Bookxvi。Chap。4。

4。Bookxvi。Chap。4。

5。Bookxxv。Ch。10。

6。Ibid。Ch。1。

TheSpiritofLawsbyCharlesdeMontesquieuCONTENTS

PrefaceAdvertisementBookI。OfLawsinGeneral1。OftheRelationofLawstoDifferentBeings2。OftheLawsofNature3。OfPositiveLawsBookII。OfLawsDirectlyDerivedfromtheNatureofGovernment1。OftheNatureoftheThreeDifferentGovernments2。OftheRepublicanGovernment，andtheLawsinRelationtoDemocracy3。OftheLawsinRelationtotheNatureofAristocracy4。OftheRelationofLawstotheNatureofMonarchicalGovernment5。OftheLawsinRelationtotheNatureofaDespoticGovernmentBookIII。OfthePrinciplesoftheThreeKindsofGovernment1。DifferenceBetweentheNatureandPrincipleofGovernment2。OfthePrincipleofDifferentGovernments3。OfthePrincipleofDemocracy4。OfthePrincipleofAristocracy5。ThatVirtueIsNotthePrincipleofaMonarchicalGovernment6。InWhatMannerVirtueIsSuppliedinaMonarchicalGovernment7。OfthePrincipleofMonarchy8。ThatHonourIsNotthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment9。OfthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment10。DifferenceofObedienceinModerateandDespoticGovernments11。ReflectionsonthePrecedingChaptersBookIV。ThattheLawsofEducationOughttoBeinRelationtothePrinciplesofGovernment1。OftheLawsofEducation2。OfEducationinMonarchies3。OfEducationinaDespoticGovernment4。DifferencebetweentheEffectsofAncientandModernEducation5。OfEducationinaRepublicanGovernment6。OfsomeInstitutionsamongtheGreeks7。InWhatCasesTheseSingularInstitutionsMayBeofService8。ExplanationofaParadoxoftheAncientsinRespecttoMannersBookV。ThattheLawsGivenbytheLegislatorOughttoBeinRelationtothePrincipleofGovernment1。IdeaofThisBook2。WhatIsMeantbyVirtueinaPoliticalState3。WhatIsMeantbyaLoveoftheRepublicinaDemocracy4。InWhatMannertheLoveofEqualityandFrugalityIsInspired5。InWhatMannertheLawsEstablishEqualityinaDemocracy6。InWhatMannertheLawsOughttoMaintainFrugalityinaDemocracy7。OtherMethodsofFavouringthePrincipleofDemocracy8。InWhatMannertheLawsShouldRelatetothePrincipleofGovernmentinanAristocracy9。InWhatMannertheLawsAreinRelationtoTheirPrincipleinMonarchies10。OftheExpeditionPeculiartotheExecutivePowerinMonarchies11。OftheExcellenceofaMonarchicalGovernment12。TheSameSubjectContinued13。AnIdeaofDespoticPower14。InWhatMannertheLawsAreinRelationtothePrinciplesofDespoticGovernment15。TheSameSubjectContinued16。OftheCommunicationofPower17。OfPresents18。OfRewardsConferredbytheSovereign19。NewConsequencesofthePrinciplesoftheThreeGovernmentsBookVI。ConsequencesofthePrinciplesofDifferentGovernmentswithRespecttotheSimplicityofCivilandCriminalLaws，theFormofJudgments，andtheInflictingofPunishments1。OftheSimplicityofCivilLawsinDifferentGovernments2。OftheSimplicityofCriminalLawsinDifferentGovernments3。InWhatGovernmentsandinWhatCasestheJudgesOughttoDetermineAccordingtotheExpressLetteroftheLaw4。OftheMannerofPassingJudgment5。InWhatGovernmentstheSovereignMayBeJudge6。ThatinMonarchiesMinistersOughtNottoSitasJudges7。OfaSingleMagistrate8。OfAccusationinDifferentGovernments9。OftheSeverityofPunishmentsinDifferentGovernments10。OftheAncientFrenchLaws11。ThatWhenPeopleAreVirtuous，FewPunishmentsAreNecessary12。OfthePowerofPunishments13。InsufficiencyoftheLawsofJapan14。OftheSpiritoftheRomanSenate15。OftheRomanLawsinRespecttoPunishments16。OftheJustProportionbetweenPunishmentsandCrimes17。OftheRack18。OfPecuniaryandCorporalPunishments19。OftheLawofRetaliation20。OfthePunishmentofFathersfortheCrimesofTheirChildren21。OftheClemencyofthePrinceBookVII。ConsequencesoftheDifferentPrinciplesoftheThreeGovernmentswithRespecttoSumptuaryLaws，Luxury，andtheConditionofWomen1。OfLuxury2。OfSumptuaryLawsinaDemocracy3。OfSumptuaryLawsinanAristocracy4。OfSumptuaryLawsinaMonarchy5。InWhatCasesSumptuaryLawsAreUsefulinaMonarchy6。OftheLuxuryofChina7。FatalConsequencesofLuxuryinChina8。OfPublicContinency9。OftheConditionorStateofWomeninDifferentGovernments10。OftheDomesticTribunalamongtheRomans11。InWhatMannertheInstitutionsChangedatRome，TogetherwiththeGovernment12。OftheGuardianshipofWomenamongtheRomans13。OfthePunishmentsDecreedbytheEmperorsagainsttheIncontinenceofWomen14。SumptuaryLawsamongtheRomans15。OfDowriesandNuptialAdvantagesinDifferentConstitutions16。AnExcellentCustomoftheSamnites17。OfFemaleAdministrationBookVIII。OftheCorruptionofthePrinciplesoftheThreeGovernments1。GeneralIdeaofThisBook2。OftheCorruptionofthePrinciplesofDemocracy3。OftheSpiritofExtremeEquality4。ParticularCauseoftheCorruptionofthePeople5。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofAristocracy6。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofMonarchy7。TheSameSubjectContinued8。DangeroftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofMonarchicalGovernment9。HowReadytheNobilityAretoDefendtheThrone10。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment11。NaturalEffectsoftheGoodnessandCorruptionofthePrinciplesofGovernment12。TheSameSubjectContinued13。TheEffectofanOathamongVirtuousPeople14。HowtheSmallestChangeoftheConstitutionIsAttendedwiththeRuinofitsPrinciples15。SureMethodsofPreservingtheThreePrinciples16。DistinctivePropertiesofaRepublic17。DistinctivePropertiesofaMonarchy18。ParticularCaseoftheSpanishMonarchy19。DistinctivePropertiesofaDespoticGovernment20。ConsequenceofthePrecedingChapters21。OftheEmpireofChinaBookIX。OfLawsintheRelationTheyBeartoaDefensiveForce1。InWhatMannerRepublicsProvideforTheirSafety2。ThataConfederateGovernmentOughttoBeComposedofStatesoftheSameNature，EspeciallyoftheRepublicanKind3。OtherRequisitesinaConfederateRepublic4。InWhatMannerDespoticGovernmentsProvidefortheirSecurity5。InWhatManneraMonarchicalGovernmentProvidesforItsSecurity6。OftheDefensiveForceofStatesinGeneral7。AReflection8。AParticularCaseinWhichtheDefensiveForceofaStateIsInferiortotheOffensive9。OftheRelativeForceofStates10。OftheWeaknessofNeighbouringStatesBookX。OfLawsintheRelationTheyBeartoOffensiveForce1。OfOffensiveForce2。OfWar3。OftheRightofConquest4。SomeAdvantagesofaConqueredPeople5。Gelon，KingofSyracuse6。OfConquestMadebyaRepublic7。TheSameSubjectContinued8。TheSameSubjectContinued9。OfConquestsMadebyaMonarchy10。OfOneMonarchyThatSubduesAnother11。OftheMannersofaConqueredPeople12。OfaLawofCyrus13。CharlesXII