Instinct of Sovereignty. But what is singular in these Laws is, that
in their Operation they are the reverse of all others.
Hor. I don't understand you.
Cleo. All other Precepts and Commandments are visibly labouring to
restrain the Passions, and cure the Imperfections of our Nature; but
these Regulations of Honour are endeavouring to prevent Mischief, by
soothing and flattering the Frailties they point at. In Offences
against a Man's Honour, Pardon is not ask'd of God or the King, but of
him who receiv'd the Affront. It is he, therefore, whom all the
Address and Homage are paid to: He is the Idol that is kneel'd to, and
the only Sovereign that can forgive the Trespasses committed against
himself. The Punishment of the first Aggressor, you see, is altogether
a Compliment to the Person offended, whose Wrath the Law is so far
from blaming, that it justifies it, and gives him an Opportunity of
indulging it by the Indignity it puts upon the Offender. The real
Mischief is not apprehended from the Offender, but the Person
offended; and therefore it is him, whom the Law coaxes and wheedles
into good Humour, by offering him a Reparation that shall be equally
honourable with what he would chuse, tho' less prejudicial to the
Society. What the Law promises is a Tribute to the same Passion which
he wants to gratify, a Sacrifice to the Idol which he himself adores.
Should Any one personate these Laws, and, representing the Sentiments
on those who made them, speak to a Man of Honour, who had receiv'd an
Affront, an Officer of the Guards, we'll say, who had been call'd Fool
by his Equal, the Purport of the Discourse would be this: You are very
much in the Right, Sir, to be highly incensed against the Man who
dared to call you Fool, you that are a Man of Honour, to whom, as
such, the whole World ought to pay the highest Esteem. You have not
only an undoubted Right to do your Self justice, and revenge the
Affront that has been given you; but there is likewise such a
Necessity of your resenting it, that if you could tamely put up the
Injury you have receiv'd, and neglect demanding Satisfaction, you
would deserve to be branded with Ignominy, and all Men of Honour would
justly refuse ever to converse with you for the future. But the
Person, whom you have this Affair with, being likewise a Man of
Honour, it is greatly to be fear'd, that upon your demanding
Satisfaction of him, a Battle will ensue, which, between two Persons
who value their Honours a Thousand Times more than their Lives, will
probably be fatal to one, if not to both; you are therefore earnestly
desired by the King himself, that for his Sake you would make some
Alteration in the Manner of taking that Satisfaction which you ought
to receive; and the Marshals of _France_ have not only given it under
their Hands, that the Equivalents, which they have proposed for
Fighting, will be as entire a Reparation to your Honour as can be
obtain'd by Arms; but moreover they have promised and engaged their
Honours, that in Cases of Affronts they will take up and content
themselves with the same Equivalents, and on all Occasions submit to
the same Regulations, which you are now desired to follow. And that it
may appear, how highly reasonable this Request is; you are likewise
desired to take the following Remonstrance into your Consideration:
That the Valour and Steadiness of Men of Honour: are the grand Support
of all States and Kingdoms, is a Truth not to be denied; and that not
only the Peace and Tranquility, and all the Blessings we enjoy, but
likewise the King's Crown and Safety would be precarious without them,
is as unquestionable. For this Reason all wise Princes, Magistrates
and Governours, will ever take all imaginable Care, on the one Hand,
to cultivate and encourage the most noble Principle of Honour, and, on
the other, to encrease the Numbers of the worthy Posessors of it, by
favouring and on all Occasions shewing them the most tender Affection,
as well as highest Esteem. It is easy then to be imagin'd, that a
Monarch, who loves his People, and has the Interest of his Nation at
Heart, must be sensibly afflicted to see it become a common Practice
for such valuable Men to destroy one another, and behold that Bravery
and Spirit, which should only be made Use of against the Enemies of
the Country, hourly employ'd and lavish'd away in private Quarrels,
that can have no other Tendency that the weakening of the Kingdom, and
which, if suffer'd to go on, must compleat its Ruin.
Hor. You make these Laws speak very notably.
Cleo. I have said Nothing but what is certainly imply'd in them. Every
Man in _France_ knew, that the chief Motive of all those Edicts against
Duelling, was the Loss of the brave Men that was sustain'd by that
Custom. The Sinfulness of it was the least Consideration.
Hor. There, I believe, you wrong them, for I have seen some of these
Edicts, where Duelling is call'd an Antichristian Practice, which God
was highly offended at.
Cleo. In wording of the Edicts, indeed, some such Thing was put in for
Form's Sake; but the Regulations themselves, by which the Men of
Honour were to walk, were openly Antichristian; and in some Cases,
instead of Teaching Men to forgive those that had trespas'd against
them, they obliged and forced the Offended to shew their Resentment,
tho' they would rather not, and desired to be excused.
Hor. Where the Affront was very heinous, I know what you say is true.
But you set these Things in a strange Light. I can make the same
Glosses upon our Laws, which oblige me to prosecute a Man that has
robb'd me, if I can catch him, whether I will or not; and he shall be
hang'd, tho' I forgive him the Injury, and even would beg his Life.
Cleo. There is a vast Difference between the two Cases, a Robbery, and
an Affront: No body hinders you from forgiving a Man that robb'd you;
but notwithstanding your pardoning him, he is punish'd for acting
against the Laws; therefore his Offence is against the King, who is
the Guardian and Superintendant of them. And No body but the King can
pardon the Trespasses that are committed against his Crown and
Dignity. Whoever robs you, must be hang'd, because he robb'd, not
because he robb'd YOU in particular: Tho' you are bound to prosecute
him for Robbing you, yet the Injury is reckon'd as done to the
Publick; and you become a Criminal your Self, if you connive at his
Escape, tho' he restor'd to you what he had robb'd you of. But in the
Case of an Affront the Injury is reckon'd to be done to him only who
receiv'd it. His Anger, as I said before, is thought to be just, and
his Resentment reasonable, till an ample Satisfaction be made him;
therefore it is He who is to be appeas'd, and He only who is to be
applied to. The Laws that were compiled by the Marshals of _France_,
don't pretend to mend the Heart, and lay no greater Restraint on the
Spirit of Revenge, than Matrimony does on the Desire of Procreation;
on the Contrary, they flatter the Frailty, and are administring to the
Haughtiness of the offended: They are so far from denying him his
Demands, or refusing to give him Satisfaction for the Affront, that
they appoint it by Authority; in the ordering of which they make such
ample Provisions for the Gratification of his Pride, as no reasonable
Man could ever think of without blushing. The only Thing they oblige
him to is, that he shall take the Satisfaction in such a Manner, as
shall be most safe to himself, and least detrimental to the Publick.
Now if you will consider first, that those who made these Regulations
were Men of undoubted Honour, who hourly feeling the Force of it
within themselves, were perfectly well acquainted with the Principle
which it is built upon; and secondly, that the profound Humility of
the Offender, and his asking Pardon of the offended, are two main
Points in the repairing of Honour, necessary _postulata_, without which
those knowing Judges thought it impossible, that an Affront could be
forgiven: If, I say, you'll consider these two Things, you'll see
plainly, what Passion in Human Nature it is, which those Laws of
Honour tally'd with, and likewise that it is true, what I have
asserted of them, that instead of reproving, curbing, or diminishing
the Frailty that is offensive, which seems to be the Intention of all
other Laws, their Aim is to prevent Mischief and do Service to the
Civil Society, by approving of, cherishing, and indulging that very
Passion, from which the Evil they would prevent can only proceed.
Hor. You think those Regulations were effectual, and yet you seem to
dislike them.
Cleo. I dislike them because they are destructive to Religion; and if
a Minister of the Gospel was to dissuade and deter Men from Duelling
he would do it in quite another Manner. By a Minister of the Gospel I
don't mean a Philosophizing Divine, or a polite Preacher, but a
sincere Follower of the Apostles, a down-right Christian. He would, in
the First Place, insist upon it, that Forgiving of Injuries was a
Christian Duty never to be dispens'd with; because it is made the
Condition on which we are taught to beg Pardon for our own Offences. In
the Second, he would demonstrate that no Man is ever to revenge
himself, how highly and how atrociously soever he might have been
injured. If ever he heard of a Man's sending a Challenge for having
been call'd Fool, or other verbal Injuries, he would reprove his
Frowardness and Want of Temper, for resenting such Trifles as the Law
of his Country thought it not worthy to take Notice of. He would
appeal to his Reason, and ask him, whether he could think, that the
Affront he complain'd of, was a sufficient Cause to take away a Man's
Life. He would represent to him the Heinousnesss of Murder, God's
express Command against it; his Justice, his Wrath, his Vengeance when
provok'd. But if all these could not divert the Dueller from his
Purpose, he would attack his stubborn Heart in its inmost Recesses,
and forget Nothing of what I told you on the Subject in our Second and
Third Conversation. He would recommend to him the Fable of the _Bees_,
and, like that, he'd dissect and lay open to him the Principle of
Honour, and shew him, how diametrically opposite the Worship of that
Idol was to the Christian Religion; the First consisting in openly
cherishing and feeding that very Frailty in our Nature, which the
latter strictly commands us with all our Might to conquer and destroy.
Having convinced him of the substantial Difference and Contrariety
between these Two Principles, he would display to him, on the one
Hand, the Vanity of Earthly Glory, and the Folly of Coveting the
Applause of a Sinful World; and, on the other, the Certainty of a
Future State, and the Transcendency of everlasting Happiness over
every Thing that is perishable. From such Remonstrances as these the
good, pious Man would take an Opportunity of exhorting him to a
Christian Self-denial, and the Practice of real Virtue, and he would
earnestly endeavour to make him sensible of the Peace of Conscience
and solid Comforts that are to be found in Meekness and Humility,
Patience, and an entire Resignation to the Will of God.
Hor. How long, pray, do you intend to go on with this Cant?
Cleo. If I am to personate a Christian Divine, who is a sincere
Believer, you must give me Leave to speak his Language.
Hor. But if a Man had really such an Affair upon his Hands, and he
knew the Person, he had to do with, to be a resolute Man that
understood the Sword, do you think he would have Patience or be at
Leisure to hearken to all that puritanical Stuff, which you have been
heaping together? Do you think (for that is the Point) it would have
any Influence over his Actions?
Cleo. If he believ'd the Gospel, and consequently future Rewards and
Punishments, and he likewise acted consistently with what he believ'd,
it would put an entire Stop to all, and it would certainly hinder him
from fending or accepting of Challenges, or ever engaging in any Thing
relating to a Duel.
Hor. Pray now, among all the Gentlemen of your Acquaintance, and such
as you your Self should care to converse with, how many are there, do
you think, on whom the Thoughts of Religion would have that Effect?
Cleo. A great many, I hope.
Hor. You can hardly forbear laughing, I see, when you say it; and I am
sure, you your Self would have no Value for a Man whom you should see
tamely put up a gross Affront: Nay, I have seen and heard Parsons and
Bishops themselves laugh at, and speak with Contempt of pretended
Gentlemen, that had suffer'd themselves to be ill treated without
resenting it.
Cleo. What you say of my self, I own to be true; and I believe the
same of others, Clergymen as well as Laymen. But the Reason why Men,
who bear Affronts with Patience, Are so generally despised is, because
Every body imagines, that their Forbearance does not proceed from a
Motive of Religion, but a Principle of Cowardice. What chiefly induces
us to believe this, is the Knowledge we have of our selves: We are
conscious within of the little Power which Christianity has over our
Hearts, and the small Influence it has over our Actions. Finding our
own Incapacity of subduing strong Passions, but by the Help of others
that are more violent, we judge of others in the same Manner: And
therefore when we see a vain, worldly Man gain such a Conquest over
his known and well establish'd Pride, we presently suspect it to be a
Sacrifice which he makes to his Fear; not the Fear of God, or
Punishment in another World, but the Fear of Death, the strongest
Passion in our Nature, the Fear that his Adversary, the Man who has
affronted him, will kill him, if he fights him. What confirms us in
this Opinion is, that Poltrons shew no greater Piety or Devotion than
other People, but live as voluptuously and indulge their Pleasures as
much, at least, as any other of the _beau monde_. Whereas a good
Christian is all of a Piece; his Life is uniform; and whoever should
scruple to send or to accept of a Challenge for the Love of God, or
but from a Fear of his Vengeance, depend upon it, he would have that
same Fear before his Eyes on other Occasions likewise: And it is
impossible that a Religious Principle, which is once of that Force,
that it can make a Man chuse to be despis'd by the World, rather than
he would offend God, should not only not be conspicuous throughout his
Behaviour, but likewise never influences the Rest of his Actions at
any other Time.
Hor. From all this it is very plain, that there are very few sincere
Christians.
Cleo. I don't think so, as to Faith and Theory; and I am persuaded,
that there are great Numbers in all Christian Countries, who sincerely
believe the Bible to be the Word of God, and the old as well as new
Testament to be a Revelation from Heaven: But as to Works and Practice
I am of your Opinion; and I not only believe, that there are very few
sincere and real Christians in their Lives and Conversation, for that
is a difficult Task, but I believe likewise, that there are very Few
who are sincere in endeavouring to be so, or even in desiring to be
real Christians. But this is no Argument against Christianity, or the
Reasonableness of its Doctrine.
Hor. I don't say it is. But as the Principle of Honour, whatever
Origin it had, teaches Men to be just in all their Dealings, and true
to their Engagements, and there are considerable Numbers in every
civiliz'd Nation, who really take Delight in this Principle, and in
all their Actions are sway'd and govern'd by it, must you not allow,
that such a Principle, let it be owing to Education, to Flattery, to
Pride, or what you please, is more useful to Society than the best
Doctrine in the World, which None can live up to, and but Few
endeavour to follow?
Cleo. Tho' those who are deem'd to be Men of Honour, are far from
being all really virtuous, yet I can't disprove, that the Principle of
Honour, such as it is, does not fully as much Good to Society as
Christianity, as it is practised; I say, to Society, and only in
respect to Temporals; but it is altogether destructive as to another
World: And as the greatest Happiness upon Earth to a good Christian,
is a firm Belief, and well grounded Hope, that he shall be Happy in
Heaven, so a Man who believes the Gospel, and pretends to value
everlasting Happiness beyond any Thing of shorter Duration, must act
inconsistently with himself unless he adheres to the Precepts of
Christianity, and at the same Time explodes the Principle of Honour,
which is the very Reverse of it.
Hor. I own, that in the Light you have put them, they seem to be, as
you say, diametrically opposite.
Cleo. You see, that those who act from a Principle of Religion, fairly
attack the Heart, and would abolish Duelling and all other Mischief,
by restraining, conquering, and destroying of Pride, Anger, and the
Spirit of Revenge; but these Passions are so necessary to Society for
the Advancement of Dominion and worldly Glory, that the Great and
Ambitious could not do without them in a Warlike Nation. Those who
compiled in _France_ the Regulations we have been speaking of, were well
aware of this: They judged from what they felt within, and knew full
well, that take away Pride, and you spoil the Soldier; for it is as
impossible to strip a Man of that Passion, and preserve in him his
Principle of Honour, as you can leave him his Bed after you have taken
away the Feathers. A peaceful Disposition and Humility are not
Qualities more promising in the Day of Battle, than a contrite Heart
an broken Spirit are Preparatives for Fighting. In these Regulations,
so often mention'd, it is plainly to be seen, what Pains and Care were
taken, not to arraign, or lay the least Blame upon the Principle of
Honour, tho' the Kingdom groan'd under a Calamity which visibly arose
from, and could be the Effect of no other Cause than that very
Principle.
Hor. All the Fault, in my Opinion, ought to be laid on the Tyranny of
Custom; and therefore the Marshals of _France_ were in the Right not to
depreciate or run the least Risque of destroying or lessening the
Principle of Honour, which, I am confident, has been a greater Tie
upon Men than any Religion whatever.
Cleo. It is impossible that there should be a greater Tie, a stronger
Barrier against Injustice, than the Christian Religion, where it is
sincerely believ'd, and Men live up to that Belief. But if you mean,
that the Number of Men, who have stuck to the Principle of Honour, and
strictly follow'd the Dictates of it, has been greater than that of
Christians, who, with equal Strictness, have obey'd the Precepts of the
Gospel; if, I say, you mean this, I don't know how to contradict you.
But I thought, that I had given you a very good Reason for that, when
I shew'd you, that in the Notions of Honour there are many Allurements
to draw-in vain worldly Men, which the Christian Religion has not; and
that the Severity of this is more mortifying and disagreable to Human
Nature, than the Self-denial which is required in the other. There are
other Reasons besides, which I have likewise hinted at more than once.
A Man may believe the Torments of Hell, and stand in great Dread of
them, whilst they are the Object of his serious Reflection; but he
does not always think of them, nor will they always make the same
Impression upon him, when he does. But in worshiping Honour, a Man
adores himself, which is ever dear to him, never absent, never out of
Sight. A Man is easily induced to reverence what he loves so entirely.
Hor. The Fear of Shame cannot restrain Men in Things that are done in
Secret, and can never be known. Men of Honour are true to their Trust,
where it is impossible they should be discover'd.
Cleo. That is not universally true; tho', without doubt, there are
many such. The grand Characteristick of a Man of Honour, at least of
Modern Honour, is, that he takes no Affront without resenting it, and
dares fight Any body without Exception; and such there are that have
not common Honesty, and are noted Sharpers. Besides, by Education and
conversing constantly with Men of Honour, and some of real Honour and
Probity, Persons may contract a strong Aversion to every Thing that is
dishonourable. The most effectual method to breed Men of Honour, is to
inspire them with lofty and romantick Sentiments concerning the
Excellency of their Nature, and the superlative Merit there is in
being a Man of Honour. The higher you can raise a Man's Pride, the
more refin'd you may render his Notions of Honour.
Hon. The Substance of this you have said twenty Times; but I don't
understand your adoring of one's self.
Cleo. I'll endeavour to explain it to you. I am acquainted with Men of
Honour, who seem to have a very slender Belief, if any, of future
Rewards and Punishiments, and whom yet I believe to be very just Men.
Of these there are several, whom I could entirely confide in, and
whose Words I would much rather take in Business of Moment than any
Bishop's, whom I know Nothing of. What is it that keeps these Men in
Awe? What keeps them true to their Word, and steady to their
Engagements, tho' they should be Losers by it?
Hor. I don't know any Thing but the Principle of Honour, that is
deeply rooted in them.
Cleo. Still the Thing, whatever it be, which a Man loves, fears,
esteems, and consequently reverences, is not without, but within
himself. The Object then of Reverence, and the Worshiper, who pays it,
meeting and remaining in the same Person, maynot such a Person be
justly said to adore himself: Nay, it seems to be the common Opinion,
that this is true; for unless some Sort of Divinity was supposed, to
reside in Men of Honour, their affirming and denying Things upon that
Principle could never be thought an Equivalent for an Oath, as to Some
it is allow'd to be. Pray, when a Man asserts a Thing upon his Honour,
is it not a Kind of Swearing by himself, as others do by God? If it
was not so, and there was supposed to be the least Danger, that Men,
endued with the Principle of Honour, could deceive or prevaricate, I
would fain know, why it should be binding and acquiesc'd in.
Hor. You may say the same of the Quakers; and that there must be
supposed to be some Divinity in them, that their solemn Affirmation
should be thought equivalent to an Oath.
Cleo. That's quite another Thing. The Quakers take all Oaths whatever,
whether they are made before a Magistrate or otherwise, to be sinful,
and for that Reason they refuse to Swear at all. But as it is their
avow'd Opinion, that a wilful notorious Lie is not less Criminal in
the Sight of Heaven than we take Perjury to be, it is evident, that in
giving their Testimony, they stake their Salvation equally with other
People that make Oath. Whereas those who, with us, are credited upon
their Honour, have no such Scruples, and make Oath themselves on other
Occasions: The Reason therefore why they don't try Criminals and
pronounce their Judgment upon Oath, as other Judges and Juries do, is
not, that they think appealing to God or Swearing by his Name to be
Sinful, which is the Case of the Quakers; but because they are
supposed to be altogether as credible without it, as if they did. And
if there was not some Adoration, some Worship, which Men of Honour pay
to themselves, the Principle they act from could not have produced the
visible Effects it has in so many different Nations.
Hor. You have said several Things which I cannot disprove, and some of
them, I own, are probable enough; but you are like to leave me as you
found me. The Principle of Honour has lost no Ground in my Esteem; and
I shall continue to act from it as I did before. But since you imagine
to have so plainly proved, that we are Idols to our Selves, and that
Honour is diametrically opposite to Christianity, I wonder you don't
call it the Beast in the _Apocalypse_, and say, that it is the Whore of
_Babylon_. This would be a notable Conceit, and suit Papists as well as
Protestants; nay, I fancy, that the Colour of the Whore, and her
Thirst after Blood, might be better accounted for from Duelling, than
any other Way that has been tried yet.
Cleo. The Revelations of St. _John_ are above my Comprehension; and I
shall never laugh at Mysteries for not understanding them.