Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

CHAPTER XI.

THE PEACE OF UTRECHT.

CHAP.

XI.

1714. 1.

racter of the

Marlbo

wars.

THE wars in which the Duke of Marlborough was engaged were not contests produced merely by the ambition of kings, or the rivalry of ministers. They were not waged for the acquisition of a province, or the Moral chacapture of a fortress. They were not incurred, like Duke of those of Frederick, for the gain of Silesia, or impelled rough's to, like those of Charles XII., by the thirst for glory. Great moral principles were involved in the contest. The League of Augsburg, which terminated in the peace of Ryswick, and first put a bridle on the ambition of France, was the direct and immediate consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, and the exile of the persecuted Protestants by Louis XIV. The War of the Succession arose unavoidably from his selfish ambition, and desire to appropriate the whole magnificent spoils of the Spanish monarchy, which he had won by diplomatic astuteness, for the aggrandisement of the house of Bourbon. But, in addition to this, the great interests of religious freedom and national independence were at stake in the struggle.

Freedom of thought, emancipation from Romish tyranny, liberty in the choice of worship, the preaching

VOL. II.

X

CHAP.
XI.

2.

terests and

causes for

which the

parties contended.

of the Gospel to the poor, were borne aloft on Marlborough's banners; national independence, death to the 1714. Bourbons, hatred to France, were inscribed on those of Opposite in- Eugene. The Church of Rome, indeed, had few more faithful subjects than the house of Hapsburg; but dread of the ambition of Louis XIV., and the glittering prospect of the Spanish succession, had brought her Catholic sovereigns into a close union with the Protestants of the north; and the admirable temper and judgment of the English and Austrian chiefs kept their troops in a state of concord and amity rarely witnessed in the best cemented alliances. Feudal honour, chivalrous loyalty, the unity of the Church, were the principles which had roused the armies and directed the councils of Louis XIV. The exaltation of France, the glory of their sovereign, the spoils of Spain, awakened the ambition of its government, and animated the spirit of its people. The influence of these opposite principles was felt not only in the council, but in the field-not only in the minister's cabinet, but in the soldier's tent. Divine service, after the Protestant form, was regularly performed, morning and evening, in every regiment of Marlborough's army; they prepared for battle by taking the sacrament; they terminated their victories by thanksgiving. The armies of Louis, in a gay and gallant spirit, set out for the conflict. If any ecclesiastic appeared to bless their arms, it was the gorgeous priests of the ancient faith; they struck rather for the honour of their country, or the glory of their sovereign, than the unity in Church and State on which he was so strongly bent; and went to battle dreaming more of the splendour of Versailles or the smiles of beauty, than of the dogmas of religion or the crusade of the Church of Rome.

CHAP.

XI.

1714.

3.

of the dan

threatened

France had

cessful.

As the principles and passions which animated the contending parties were thus opposite, proportionately great was the peril to the cause alike of religious freedom. and of European independence, if the coalition had not Magnitude proved successful. That no danger was to be apprehended ger which to these from its triumph has been decisively proved by Europe, if the event; the Allies were victorious, and both of them proved suchave been preserved. But very different would have been. the results, if a power, animated by the ambition, guided by the fanaticism, and directed by the ability, of the cabinet of Louis XIV., had gained the ascendency in Europe. Beyond all question, a universal despotic dominion would have been established over the bodies, a cruel spiritual thraldom over the minds, of men. France and Spain united under Bourbon princes, and in a close family alliance the Empire of Charlemagne with that of Charles V.-the power which revoked the Edict of Nantes, and perpetrated the massacre of St Bartholomew, with that which banished the Moriscoes, and established the Inquisition would have proved irresistible, and beyond example destructive to the best interests of mankind.

ed the tri

France.

The Protestants might have been driven, like the Pagan heathens of old by the son of Pepin, beyond the Results which might Elbe; the Stuart race, and with them Romish ascen- have followdency, might have been re-established in England; the umph of fire lighted by Latimer and Ridley might have been extinguished in blood; and the energy breathed by religious freedom into the Anglo-Saxon race might have expired. The destinies of the world would have been changed. Europe, instead of a variety of independent states, whose mutual hostility kept alive courage, while their national rivalry stimulated talent, would have sunk into the slumber attendant on universal dominion.

The

CHAP.

XI.

1714.

sides on po

tions on

which the

parties were

ranged, si

milar to

what after

wards oc

colonial empire of England would have withered away and perished, as that of Spain has done in the grasp of the Inquisition. The Anglo-Saxon race would have been arrested in its mission to overspread the earth and subdue it. The centralised despotism of the Roman Empire would have been renewed on continental Europe; the chains of Romish tyranny, and with them the general infidelity of France before the Revolution, would have extinguished or perverted thought in the British islands. There, too, the event has proved the justice of these anticipations. France, during the eighteenth century, has taught us in what state our minds would have been, had Marlborough been overthrown; the infidelity of Voltaire, to what a state of anarchy our religious opinions would have been reduced; the despotism of Napoleon, at its close, to what tyranny our persons would have been subjected.

The opposite principles which animated the contendOpposite ing parties were very similar to those which a century litical ques- after ranged Europe against France, in the wars of the French Revolution; the great conflict of the eighteenth century was but an extension, to the political and social relations of men, of the religious divisions which discurred. tracted the seventeenth. But in one respect the antagonists were on the opposite sides. In so far as they were banded together against the ambition of France, the coalition of 1689 was guided by the same principles as that of 1793-the armies of Eugene struck for the same cause as those of the Archduke Charles. But in so far as they contended for a moral principle, their relative position was in a great measure reversed -England, in the wars of William and Anne, was on the side of civil and religious freedom; she stood fore

most in the contest for liberty of thought and the free
choice of worship; she was herself the first and greatest
of revolutionary powers. France supported the despot-
ism of the Romish faith, and that system of unity in
civil government which aimed at extending chains as
strong over the temporal concerns of men.
The industry
of towns, the wealth of commerce, arrayed a numerous
but motley array of many nations around the banner of
St George; the strength of feudal attachment, the
loyalty of chivalrous devotion, brought the strength of a
gallant people round the oriflamme of St Denis.

CHAP.

XI.

1714.

6.

mentally

and France

were in both

cases ranged

on the same

sides.

Yet, though apparently on opposite, the forces of the coalition and of France were in reality ranged on the Yet fundasame sides in the War of the Succession as in that of the the Allies French Revolution. In both, religion and freedom were the principles on which the Allies rested, and unity of government and military glory were the moving springs of effort in France. The iron rule of the Convention, the despotism of Napoleon, were essentially identical with the government of Louis XIV., though wielded by different hands and in a different name. National independence, religious duty, breathed in the proclamations of Alexander not less than in the daily services amidst the tents of Marlborough. It matters not by whom despots are elected, provided they are despots and support power. The absolute nature of a contest is not to be judged of merely by the war-cries which the parties. raise, or the banners under which their forces are nominally enrolled. The true test is to be found in the practical tendency and social results of the institutions. for which its partisans contend. The cause of real freedom is often advanced by the victories gained by a monarch's armies; the march of practical despotism is

« ForrigeFortsett »