travels called his attention to national characteristics, and he said—"When I am in France I am everybody's friend; in England nobody's; in Italy I pay compliments to everybody, and in Germany I drink with everybody." After his visit to England, Montesquieu returned to France and settled in his castle of La Brède. There he prepared his "Considerations sur les causes de la grandeur et do la decadence des Romains"—a remarkable work, inferior in style to nothing the author has written. But in pondering on Roman success and Roman decay, Montesquieu was engaged with only one people. He had a more ambitious subject. He wished to extract the principles that rule the civilized nations of the earth, without reference to mere local or accidental circumstances; and after twenty years of labour and meditation, he gave to the world his famous work, "De l'Esprit des Lois," published in 1748. He showed the manuscript to Helvetius, who formed so unfavourable an opinion of the production that he requested permission to consult with Saurin regarding the propriety of publication. Saurin agreed with Helvetius; but Montesquieu followed his own course, and ran the risk of any danger that might accrue to his reputation. Nor was he disappointed. So rapid was the demand for the work, that when the Austrian government thought proper to prohibit its circulation within the Austrian dominions, the author was able to state to the Austrian ambassador that "in a year and a half twenty-two editions had been called for, and that the work had been translated into almost all languages." The work was much read, admired, praised, and criticised. Madame du Deffand said of it that it was not "l'esprit des lois," but "l'esprit sur les lois"—an epigram that suited France in the middle of the eighteenth century. The critics had many faults to find, and not without reason. They complained of principles not founded on facts, or not borne out by experience; of an imperfect appreciation of the feudal system; of a tendency to refer moral phenomena to the material causes of climate and circumstance; of obscurity, want of order, and want of precision. In all these charges there was a certain amount of truth. But the grand merit of the work was one of impression, rather than of instruction. It aimed a heavy blow at the mere pedantry of law, and taught that laws were made by and for men, and not merely for casuists as the tools and instruments of a legal superstition. It inverted the then current idea of law. It showed that law, instead of flowing from the will of those in power, was an arrangement for the general benefit of all, and to which all ought to be subject. It was the first popular work which robbed law of its despotism, and based it on the principle of common advantage. In England it was far more appreciated than in France. It struck a note recognized as a true one by the English mind, and introduced the modern system which makes law subservient to the good of the community. Simple as this view may appear, it was then entirely novel in France, and of course was regarded as a heresy. But in England the development of law, and its many judicious reforms, have been made in the humane and common-sense direction pointed out or rather assumed by Montesquieu; and thus the "Esprit des Lois" has greatly contributed to that wise spirit of moderation which characterizes the legislation of modern times. Nor was the author without the practical benevolence which shows that his convictions were derived from sincerity of feeling. The story of the Marseilles boatman, whose father he redeemed from the slavery of the Moors at an expense of two thousand crowns, is almost universally known, and illustrates some of the peculiarities of Montesquieu's character; for it was only after his death that a clue could be obtained to the author of so magnificent a display of disinterested generosity. After the publication of the "Esprit des Lois," Montesquieu divided his time between La Brède and Paris. He still continued his habitual course of study; and at the solicitation of D'Alembert, contributed to the Encyclopedie an essay on taste. His constitution, however, was rapidly failing, and he was unable to complete the revision which he had contemplated of his works. He died at Paris of fever, after an illness of thirteen days; the jesuits attempting to obtain from him some recantation of his earlier opinions contained in the "Persian Letters." He said to a friend that he would sacrifice anything for religion, but nothing for the jesuits. On receiving the last offices of the church, the curé said to him—"Sir, you understand how great God is?" "Yes;" was the reply, "and how little man is."—P. E. D.
MONTETH, Robert, a Scottish ecclesiastic and historian, who derived the designation of Salmonet, from the place of his birth, near Airth, on the Frith of Forth. He was chaplain to Cardinal de Retz, who made him a canon of Nôtre Dame. He wrote in French a history of his native country from the accession of Charles I. to the close of the great civil war. It was translated into English by J. Ogilvie, and published in London in 1735, under the title of "A History of the Troubles of Great Britain," folio. The date of his death is unknown.—J. T.
MONTEVERDE, Claudio, whose name is celebrated in musical history as one of the greatest discoverers in the then unknown regions of harmony, was born at Cremona between the years 1565 and 1570. Very little is known of his life. He studied counterpoint under Marc-Antonio Ingegneri, chapel-master to the duke of Mantua, and succeeded his instructor in that office. In 1613 he was appointed chapel-master of the church of St. Mark at Venice, which situation he held till his death in 1649. Monteverde composed the opera of "Orfeo" for the court of Mantua in 1607. It was printed at Venice in 1615. The boldness of the composer's genius is observable in the great improvement of the orchestra. The number and variety of the instruments are greatly increased, and the voices are not indiscriminately accompanied by the whole band; but the music performed by the several singers is accompanied by instruments of various kinds, specially arranged to each character. The overture is a very short prelude in harmony of five parts for a trumpet and other instruments, which is directed to be played three times before the rising of the curtain. Then the prologue is delivered in recitative; its purport being to explain the argument of the piece and bespeak the attention of the audience. The opera begins by a speech in recitative by a shepherd, followed by a chorus in five parts, accompanied by all the instruments. Other choruses are directed to be accompanied in different ways—by guitars, violins, and flutes. There are no airs for a single voice, but recitatives, choruses, trios, and duets, make up the piece, which concludes with a dance to a tune called a Moresca. It is a lively strain, with a well-marked but peculiar rhythm, four times repeated, and ingeniously' carried into different major and minor keys. Monteverde's management of his orchestra in the very infancy of this branch of the art is worthy of particular notice, as he appears to have anticipated the principles of instrumentation which have been since adopted by the greatest dramatic composers. He composed a great number of madrigals, an accurate list of which is given by M. Fetis in his Biographic des Musiciens. He was the first who used double discords. In his fifth and last book of madrigals, indeed, almost every species of discord and modulation is hazarded, for the use of which the boldest composers of modern times have been often thought licentious.—E. F. R.
MONTEZUMA II., Emperor of the Aztecs, the last real sovereign of the Mexican empire, was born about 1466, and succeeded to the regal dignity, which had been previously held by his grandfather and uncle, in 1502. He was chosen in preference to his brother for his superior qualifications, both as a soldier and a priest; and during the first years of his reign was constantly engaged in war with the neighbouring tribes, extending his power to the Gulf of Mexico. He bestowed constant labour also on the improvement of his capital and the amelioration of the laws; but in later years alienated his subjects by his ostentatious splendour and the consequent burdens imposed on them. In April, 1519, the Spanish adventurer Cortez landed on the coast with five hundred followers, and determined on the conquest of the empire. An embassy sent to the capital was received with courtesy, and Montezuma betrayed at the same time his riches and his fears, by sending munificent presents, coupled with a request that the strangers should not approach nearer to his capital. Cortez, having first conquered the independent republic of Tlascala, and secured a band of warriors as his allies, marched upon Mexico, and entered the magnificent city, 19th of November, 1519. This apparently superhuman achievement gave force to a superstition current among the Mexicans that about this time the descendants of their ancient rulers would return to resume the sovereignty; and the handful of invaders were received with respect by Montezuma, who, after some delay, consented to acknowledge himself a vassal of the Spanish crown. He was induced, or rather compelled, to take up his residence in the quarter of the city assigned to the Spaniards, and was held by them in a scarcely honourable captivity. In May, 1520, Cortez was obliged to leave the city to meet a
