ART. IX.

Hiftoire de la Rivalité de la France & de l'Angleterre, par M. Gaillard, de l'Academie Françoise & de l'Academie des Infcriptions & Belles Lettres.-The Hiftory of the Rival hip of France and England, &c. 12mo. 3 Vols. 3 Vols. Paris. 1771.

HIS agreeable Writer, who obliges the world with an Hiftory of the Rivalfhip of France and England, appears to unite that delicacy of language, for which the French academicians have long been eminent, with fentiments generally juft, and an enlarged benevolence of heart.

"Attention to others" feems to be the true bafis of politeness; and we Reviewers fhould be forry to give occafion to Mr. Gaillard to conclude, from any inattention to his work, that we Englishmen have no title to pretend to rivalihip with the French in the article of politenefs. But, to be ferious:

We efteem the fubject of this work to be of so much importance to all our Readers, not only as Englishmen, but as men, that we think it our duty to give fuch a fair representation of this Hiftory, as may enable them to judge whether any French academician be able to keep prejudice out of the facred circle of their academy.

Mr. G. begins his preface (which contains above 40 pages) with an handfome profeffion that although he is a Frenchman, he will endeavour never to forget, that it is the duty of an Hiftorian to be impartial, and of a Man to be juf.-He loves France, and esteems England, and refpects himself too much to flatter or abufe, inftead of examining and judging. He adds, all men, however diftant, are brethren, and effentially friends. He who loves war is the only enemy of mankind.-This (fays he) is an old truth always new! Europe is polite, but makes war, and therefore is ftill barbarous.' 'Speculative truths (as he obferves) must be inculcated long before they become practifed.

Men have discovered (continues Mr. G.) that ambitious conquerors are unjust, but not fufficiently, that they are foolifb. War appears already horrible, but I will fhew it to be abfurd, and ridiculous too.' He proves war to be ridiculous because inefficacious to the end proposed.

He next fhews, that true or juft policy means to conquer, in order to preserve poffeffion of conquefts in peace; but war either only reduces our enemy to a shameful peace till he can contend again with more fuccefs, or entirely ruins him. This deftruction of HIM naturally causes the deftruction, or at least the weakening of OURSELVES, by the jealousy of our neighbours, or by interior vices.

Mr. G. confirms this general truth by referring to the hiftory of all nations, particularly of Rome. He juftly oblerves that

this must always be the cafe, which philofophy forefees and hiftory relates. Among the particular caufes concuring to produce this great effect, which he juftly enumerates, we are efpecially pleased with two, as doing honour to the pen of a Frenchman, viz. the indifference of members of the conquering nations towards their country, and the innate love of the conquered towards their country, which tyranny can never ftifle.'

Mr. G. obferves, that the dreams of univerfal empire feem to be pretty much at an end in Europe, and then, after expatiating on the enormities of modern wars, he cries out, like a good man, Befide the expence of human blood, which is invaluable, he who calculates what it has coft Europe to determine nothing, will look with horror,' &c. He adds, in the fpitit of juft fatire, that when philofophy compares two prize-fighters flashing each other, then drinking together like friends, with two polifhed heroes, the fees no difference, except that the latter gladiators produce more terrible confequences.

Our Author doubts whether the discovery of a new world has done more harm or service to mankind; but he remarks, that it has produced as much difpute about the freedom and exclufiveness of fea and trade, as before fubfifted about univerfal monarchy.

And here Mr. G. takes an opportunity of giving an agreeable view of the government of Pennfylvania, whofe capital takes its name from brotherly love. He thinks almoft the only fubject of envy which we afford the French, is this little colony, whofe original 500 inhabitants have, in a little time, produced 300,000. Our Author judges that the fingularities of the Quakers occafioned their forming this colony, and owns that they pushed their love of peace to excess.

Mr. G. infifts again on his favourite topic, viz. that war is an ineffectual means to the end propofed, viz. the lafting enjoyment of conquefts; and to the general reafons above affigned, he adds particular ones, viz. the change in the art of war by improvements in artillery, from whence ancient courage, which was boldness founded on fkill, is changed to brutal oblinacy, and war is become ftill more abfurd.

This Writer admirably obferves, that the ancient conquerors came from countries where their people starved, to plentiful ones; but that modern conquerors really gain nothing by their conquefts.

He draws a juft and fine picture of the prince who improves his country by all focial arts; and concludes, that till there are carried to their height, no colonies fhould be thought of. He afks, How the right of nations can admit of war?' and obferves, that a maleficent policy has made even a state of peace a ftate of war, by tricks of negociation, &c.

S

Among

Among other royal cheats Mr. G. places Louis XI. of France, with Ferdinand and Charles V. of Spain, and draws fo lively a picture of Ferdinand, that nothing but our neceffary brevity

could excufe an omiffion of fome traits of it.

Mr. G. apprehends that Tacitus has contributed to make men admire cunning rogues with crowns. He fhews that there is no greatnefs of mind in continual lying, and that if there were greatnefs in it, this could not long have fuccefs.

He recommends to all princes a maxim opposite to Machiavelifm, viz. "Who knows not how to be just and goed, knows not how to reign."

May this motto be engraved not on the plate, the gold and the filver of kings, but on their hearts!

. He obferves, that the unhappy effects of not applying to fates what is allowed true of individuals, viz. that honesty is the beft policy;" and that the defign of this work is to convince France and England, by the confequences of their ancestors' quarrels, that they fhould live like fifters. He undertakes to thew. the English, that their tranfient fucceffes in France were owing to the divifions of the French, and the definitive success of the French, to their too tranji nt virtues.

He allures his readers who have fuch delicacy as to be dif gufted with the detail of war, that he will never enter into it when not neceffary; that he will rather infift on its causes than operations, and this only with a defign to make men love peace. He promifes to have great regard to manners and arts, &c. He declares, that when he recommends peace, he is not actuated by fear for France, nor by compaffion for England, (Englishmen will fmile) but writes as a private philofopher, who thinks war not the trade of men, but of lions and tygers!

This fpirited though long preface deferved our short account of it, that the liberal Reader may judge, in general, what entertainment is prepared for him in this capital work.

A fhort advertisement informs the Reader, that Mr. G. chofe to execute his plan of recommending peace, by an history of the rivalfhip of two nations, the mofl ancient, the most famous, and moft perfevering!

He has prefixed, to his main work, an introduction of about 180 pages, in which he fhews the two nations advancing from obfcurity to a ftate of fhining rivalfhip. This part of his work he has divided into four chapters. In the first of these he traces their earlieft fteps towards a conflitution; in the second, the ravages of the Danes in England, and the Normans in France, with their effects on manners, &c. in the third, the influence of the Dukes of Normandy over France; and in the laft he difplays the events preparative to the conqueft of England, by William I.

In

In this introduction, are many curious, entertaining, and interefting particulars, well felected and concifely exprefled; but the necellary limits of this article obliges us to pass them with this general mention, as we must notice the moft ftriking inftances of rivalfhip fpecified in the work before us.,

Mr. G. very properly makes the conqueft of England by William 1. the ara from whence he dates the commencement. of that rivalfhip which he relates.

He justly obferves the great want of policy in the regency of France, which not only oppofed not, but even aided William's invafion of this ifland, as by thefe means they contributed to aggrandize a vaffal of that crown, already formidable enough, efpecially in a minority.

His defcription of the famous battle of Haftings is concife, juft, and lively.

Philip I. of France, become of age, quickly perceives the bad policy by which the regency, in his minority, had aided William's conqueft of England, and therefore readily gives affiftance to a great rebel against William, in Bretagne, viz. Ralph de Guair, and makes the Conqueror fly before him.

On the fame principle of reducing William's greatness, and more juftly, Philip fupports his ill-ufed fon Robert.

That prince's unhorfing his father is fo well defcribed, as to create furprize in any Reader who is not acquainted with the itory.

Philip, who oppofed William I. on principles of right policy, would have acted an abfurd part if he had not, on the fame principles, continued to oppofe William II. who grofsly injured his brother Robert, the true heir to Normandy, &c.

But this French monarch proves fo indolent as to fit down content with the divifion of that dutchy between the two brothers, judging apparently that fuch divifion would create con-. tinual disturbance between them.

Nay, our Hiftorian confefles, that Philip was fo weak as to accept the bribes of William, to connive at his continued injuries committed on Robert: which was in effect to receive. bribes against himself, as Robert was much weaker, and should have been, both in justice and policy, fupported.

Mr. G. now delineates, very juftly, all the caufes which contributed to produce thofe abfurd cxpeditions of European princes into the Holy Land, which took off their attention from their own affairs, and buried the gold and blood of Chriftians in the. land which really belonged to Infidels. The caufes which he.

* Mr. G. notices (p. 215.) a great error of Dr. Smollett, who fuppofes that Philip recovered the Vexin during William's minority; but William was 16 years older than Philip.

enumerates

enumerates are, ift, The fplendor of recovering the holy fepulchre, &c. from Infidels. 2. The exhortations of Peter the Hermit, an eloquent and fenfible man. 3. The inftances of popes. 4. The intrigues of monks. 5. The lure of novelty. 6. The ardour of chivalry. 7. The fuperftition of kings and people. 8. The defire of devout rafcals to gain at once fortune and abfolution. 9. Hope of extending commerce, &c.

But to look particularly to their effects on France and England, we may obferve, that Philip (or rather his fon and affo ciate, Louis the Fat) began to confider our William II. as a more formidable rival, when he faw that his brother Robert, impatient to be equipped for the holy war, had mortgaged to him Normandy, and that William had alfo obtained, on mortgage, both Aquitaine and Guienne. However, a violent death quickly releafed both Philip and Louis from all fears of William.

Louis the Fat had fenfe and vigour enough to endeavour to prevent the joining of Normandy to England under Henry I. Mr. G. afcribes his difappointment to the over-greatness of the vaffals of the crown, who were unwilling to help the fovereign to deprefs their brethren. There was certainly fome effect from this caufe. He deems the greatnefs of these chief vaffals of the crown an ufurpation, and confequently praifes Louis for his juft policy in applying himself to reduce this feudal tyranny to what he thinks the ancient monarchical govern

ment.

There was now, after a course of friendship, a personal and declared rivalship betwixt Louis and Henry. The former challenges the latter to fingle combat, and on his declining it, but giving a general battle, beats him, and takes under his protection William Cliton (or Criton) fon of Duke Robert.

However, if Henry had the difadvantage in this action, he gained an advantage, at leaft equal, in the famous rencounter of Brenneville.

Our Henry had fecretly ftimulated the Emperor Henry V. to march against France. That Emperor fcarce made his appearance on the borders, and fled.-Hereupon Louis, provoked by King Henry's conduct, propofes to lead his forces against Normandy; but the great vaffals refuse to move.

On the character of Henry's dying fon, Mr. G. makes some fevere ftrictures t.

The death of William Cliton, or Criton (who had been made Count of Flanders) which now happened, is a great loss

"Avoit dit plufieurs fois que fi regnoit jamais, il attacheroit les hommes les hommes, au joug comme les boeufs.-Des hiftoriens ont pretendus qu'en cette occafion [Mort du jeune Henri] l' Eau avoit puni en lui un vice qui l'avoit eté autrefois par le Feu." P. 304-5.

to