MONTESQUIEU AND GUIZOT From the Regime to Society by STEVEN PATRICK CONNOLLEY A thesis submitted to the Department of Sociology in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Queen's University Kingston, Ontario, Canada August, 1998 copyright Q Steven Patrick Comolley, 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Sewices services bibliographiques 395 Weliingtori Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaON K1AW ûüôw ON K1A ON4 canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Liirary of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distriiîute or seli reproduire, prêter, distri'buer ou copies of this thesis in microfonn, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic fonnats. la forme de microfiche/fiim. de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the &oit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor mbstantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT This thesis has compared the idea of political determinism - i.e., the notion that the regime has causal primacy over its society - with the idea of sociai determinism - Le., the notion that political institutions are effects of social conditions. Consequently, this argument juxtaposed Montesquieu's political determinism with Guizot's social determinism. The first chapter described how Montesquieu considered a vast array of extra-political factors but nevertheless rnaintained the traditionai view of the regime as holding causal primacy over its society. The second chapter illustrated the movement away frorn the emphasis on the regime in both Britain and France. This chapter, moreover, argued that Guizot's works brought together these reflections and were the first to apply systematically the idea of social determinism. The fmd chapter analyzed how both Montesquieu's political determinism and Guizot's social determinism were important elements of political debate during the Bourbon Restoration. This examination demonstrated how both political detedsmand social determinism significantly inforrned views on the appropriate role of government. Whereas the Right tended to dernand that the govemment confer order on society, the Left asserted that the governent could only remain stable by accepting the new set of sociai conditions. More generally, the debates of the Bourbon Restoration suggest the need for careful consideration of how ideas on the relation between the regime and sociery might direct current courses of debate in both academic and political settings. 1 would like to thank Dr. Gunn for generously offering his assistance. This rare opportunity has allowed me to study political theory according to the highest scholarly standards. 1 am especially grateful for his insightful and critical comrnents, which have prevented me fiom committing countless errors, and, more importantly, have directed me toward a greater appreciation for the fmer points of logic, grarnmar, and style. 1 would also like to thank Dr. Beamish for his many helpful suggestions and for supporting the aims of this work. This work, of course, is dedicated to my parents whose support for my academic endeavours is unparalleled. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................. i .. Acknowledgements ................................................................................ il 1 Introduction ................................................................................. 1 Montesquieu & Political Determinism ................................................. 7 1 .Montesquieu's variation on classical politicai philosophy ............... 9 II .The Spirit of the Laws and the typology of regimes ..................... 12 A w The. nature. .of regirnes. .............................................. 12 B .Political pnnciples .................................................. 17 C .Political principles and the breadth of the regimels inHuence.21 III .The General Spirit of a Nation ............................................ 22 A .Definition ........................................................... 24 B .The causal primacy of the regime within the General Spirit .. 26 C .Charges of climatic determinism................................. 27 IV O Two examples pf Montesquieu's political determinism ............... 29 A O Example 1: Slavery and Climate................................. 29 B .Example 2: The faulty structure of the Roman regime ........ 32 V .Conclusion .................................................................... 34 Developments of Social Determinkm from Montesquieu to Guizot ............... 35 1 .The development of social determinism in Britain ....................... 36 A O The Scottish Enlightenrnent and the waning of the regime ... 36 1 .David Hume ................................................ 36 2 .The social determinism of Adam Ferguson . John Millar. and Adam Smith ................ .. ............... 39 B .The social determinism of David Williams ..................... 42 II O The development of social determinism in France ..................... 51 A .Louis de Bonald's contribution to sociological thought ...... 51 B O François Mignet1sminor contribution........................... 54 C .The social determinisrn of Guizot ................................ 57 1 .Essais sur l'histoire de ka France ........................ 58 2 .Example: the origin of the nobility ...................... 59 III .Guizot's decisive contribution to social determinism .................. 62 A .Guizot vs. the Scots ................................................ 62 B .Guizot vs. Bonald .............. ....... .............................. 64 .Example: .. Charlemagne ............... .... ............... 65 C .Guizot vs. Williams. ............................................... 68 The impact of both Political Determinism and Social Determinism during the Bourbon Restoration................................................................. 70 I .The challenges of the Bourbon Restoration.............................. 70 .Incidents coneibuting to the political divide ...................... 73 II O Fundamental orientations of both the Left and the Right .............. 75 A O Guizot: the Charter as recognizing the new society ........... 76 B œ The Royalists: the Charter as conferring social order ......... 81 III .The presence of both political deterrninisrn and social determinism in political debate ......................................................... 83 A .Promotion and recruitment in the armed forces ............... 84 B œ Altering the electoral system ..................................... 89 C .The symbolic recognition of pnmogeniture .................... 96 IV .Conclusion .................................................................. 104 5 Conclusion ............................................................................... 105 . Bibliography ...................................................................................... 108 Vita ................................................................................................ 1 12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Broadly speaking, this work approaches the vast problem of the definition of the unit of analysis known as society. Although the everyday practice of the social sciences takes this terrn for granted, its conceptualization rernains nebulous and consequently problematic. What is and what is not a society ofien becomes unclear. This was not a great concem for classical political philosophy and its main int, the regime. The relatively concrete character of the regime, with its reference to the city state's predominant political institutions, ailowed the classicd political philosopher to categorize a collectivity, for exarnple, as a democracy, a monarchy, a mix of the two, and so on. Moreover, these schemes of classification ailowed for the recognition of the set of practices and beliefs that result from the particular political organization. This thesis limits its investigation to the moment when considerations of society eclipse the political regime as a unit of analysis. Accordingly, Montesquieu's The Spirit of the Lam [1748] and the early works of François Guizot during the 1820's make for an interesting cornparison. On the one hand, Montesquieu is ofien considered to be one of the earliest pioneers of the notion of society and the sociologicaI tradition. Although he worked primarily within the framework of the regime, he sought to illustrate how the various foms of government Uitluence a people's way of life outside the politicai sphere and even how the way of life cmcharacterize the regime itself. On the other hand, building on subsequent developments in sociologicd understanding, which were ofien inspired by Montesquieu's efforts, Guizot may be considered as the fikt figure to emphasize systematicdy the importance of social conditions over political institutions. Montesquieu's notion of socie~- which arose fiom, yet remained subordinate to, the regime - is thus juxtaposed with Guizot's view, which reduces politicd institutions to being e ffects of existing social conditions. More specifically,