Charles XII. was brave, noble, generous, and disinterested,--a complete
hero, in fact, and a regular fire-eater. Yet, in spite of these
qualifications and the eulogiums of his biographer, it is pretty evident
to those who impartially consider the career of this potentate, that he
was by no means of a sane mind. In short, to speak plainly, he was mad,
and deserved a strait-waistcoat as richly as any straw-crowned monarch
in Bedlam. A single instance, in _my_ opinion, fully substantiates
this. I allude to his absurd freak at Frederickshall, when, in order to
discover how long he could exist without nourishment, he abstained from
all kinds of food for more than seventy hours! Now, would any man in his
senses have done this? Would Louis XVIII., for instance, that wise and
ever-to-be-lamented monarch? Had it been the _reverse_ indeed--had
Charles, instead of practising starvation, adopted the opposite
expedient, and endeavoured to ascertain the greatest possible quantity
of meat, fruit, bread, wine, vegetables, Sec. &c. he could have
_disposed of_ in any given time--why then it might have been
something! But to _fast_ for three days! if this be not madness--!
Indeed, there is but one reason I could ever conceive for a person not
eating; and that is, when, like poor Count Ugolino and his family, he
can get _nothing to eat_!
Charles, now, and Louis--what a contrast! The first despised the
pleasures of the table, abjured wine, and would, I dare say, just
as soon have been without "a distinguishing taste" as with it. Your
Bourbon, on the contrary, a five-mealed man, quaffing right Falernian
night and day; and wisely esteeming the gratification of his palate of
such importance, as absolutely to send from Lisle to Paris--distance
of I know not how many score leagues--at a crisis, too, of peculiar
difficulty--for a single _pâte_! "Go," cried the illustrious exile to
his messenger; "dispatch, _mon enfant_! Mount the _tricolor_! Shout
_Vive le Diable_! Any thing! But be sure you clutch the precious
compound! Napoleon has driven me from my throne; but he cannot deprive
me of my appetite!" Here was courage! I challenge the most enthusiastic
admirer of Charles to produce a similar instance of indifference to
danger!
There is another trait in the character of Louis which equally demands
our admiration, and proves that the indomitable firmness may be
sometimes associated with the most sensitive and--I had almost
said--infantine sensibility. Of course, it will be perceived that I
allude to the peculiar tenderness by which that amiable prince was often
betrayed, even into tears, upon occasions when ordinary minds would have
manifested comparative _nonchalance_. I have been assured that Louis
absolutely wept once at Hartwell, _merely because oysters were out of
season_!--a testaceous production, to which he was remarkably
attached, (whence his cognomen of _Des Huîtres_, by corruption
_Dix-huit_;) so much so, indeed, as to be literally _ready to
eat them_, whenever they were brought into his presence. It is said
that this worthy descendant of the Good _Henrí_ used to put a
barrel of Colchester oysters daily _hors de combat_, merely to
_give him an appetite_.
_Monthly Magazine._
* * * * *