Voltaire, you are the Confucius of Europe

This article is based on the Philosophical Gate

A Picture of Eastern Law by French Enlightenment Thinkers

Gong Pi Xiang

About author:Doctor of Laws, Professor of Law School of Nanjing Normal University, Doctoral Supervisor.

Photocopy of the National People's Congress: Jurisprudence and Legal History, No. 02, 2002

Original Journal: Jinling Law Review, Autumn Issue, 2001, pp. 105-117

The Enlightenment in modern France is a major event that promotes the formation and development of the "age of reason" in the modern West, and occupies an important position in the history of the West and even the entire history of human civilization. However, if this enlightenment-bound thinker held the same or similar view in attacking and denying the fundamental question of French absolutism and ecclesiastical rule, their views on Eastern society and Chinese legal culture showed such obvious differences and even considerable degrees of opposition. This is indeed a phenomenon of thought worth playing with. In that so-called "age of reason," "although the ancient civilizations of Asia were recognized, the Europeans (who were at a time when their own systems and customs were undergoing rapid change) at the same time had to explain the stagnation of the old farming experiences and polities and traditions of Asia. The ancient civilizations of Asia and their subsequent stagnation became a matter of philosophical, legal, ethical, historical, and political reflection in Europe during the Eighteenth-Century Enlightenment. (Note: Lawrence Cradle: "A History of Eastern Society in Western European Writings," translated in Studies on the Origins of Marxism Series, Vol. 15, The Commercial Press, 1993, p. 91.) However, the conclusive opinions drawn from this reflection are so different that they give a vague impression and fully indicate the complexity of the problems of the East. In fact, no matter how different these views may be, the reflection on the question of Eastern society itself reflects from a particular point of view the basic attitude of these thinkers towards the European society on which they live and act. Thus, the Enlightenment thinkers' eastern view of society and law was undoubtedly influenced by many factors.

I. Voltaire: "The Confucius of Europe"

The French said that the 18th century was Voltaire's century. Indeed, in the magnificent 18th-century French Enlightenment, the famous thinker Francois Marie Voltaire (1694-1778) stood at the forefront of this spiritual movement, guiding the direction of the movement, and was called the leader and teacher of the Enlightenment. Voltaire wrote a large number of literary, philosophical, and political treatises, attacking the dark forces of the old system and the church, propagating truth and reason, and looking forward to the arrival of a new society of democracy, benevolence, and freedom, thus erecting a monument of thought in the history of human civilization. Voltaire's eastern social and legal cultural thought was one of the important components of his entire system of doctrine. Although he did not personally travel to the countries of the East, from the large number of oriental travels and narratives at that time, especially the first-hand materials on China provided by the Jesuit missionaries, and from the writings of the oriental sages, he clearly saw the vivid image of the East that was very different from that of Western Europe, and deeply felt the intrinsic value of the oriental spirit. His exposition of the inherent righteousness of Chinese civilization and culture, especially the high respect for Confucius, made important contributions to the dissemination of Chinese civilization and the promotion of the Enlightenment, so that in the minds of Europeans at that time, Voltaire was "the Confucius of Europe".

(Note: In the winter of 1767, a young German man wrote to Voltaire: "You are the Confucius of Europe, the greatest philosopher in the world. Your enthusiasm and genius, as well as your humanitarian deeds, have earned you a place that no one in the world would ever have dared to aspire to: you are on a par with the most famous great men of antiquity." See Volthé's Collected Letters, Bestelmann Edition, Letter No. 13638; quoted from Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, Xinhua Publishing House, 1993, p. 15. Voltaire, referring to Confucius's thought in the entry "On China" in his book "The Question concerning the Encyclopedia," wrote: "I have carefully read and summarized all his writings; in these books I have found only the purest morality, and not the slightest charlatan's goods..." See Dictionary of Philosophy, Galija Brothers Publishing House, 1967, p. 481; quoted from Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, pp. 16-17. ）

Voltaire has a basic starting point for examining the legal culture of traditional Eastern society, that is, to discover the commonalities and historical differences in the growth of human society and civilization. In his view, things connected to human nature are common or similar to human society, while things related to customs and habits are different in different societies and countries. He pointed out: "Everything that is intimately connected with human nature is similar in all parts of the world; and everything that may depend on custom is different, and if it is similar, it is some kind of coincidence." The influence of custom is more extensive than that of human nature, it involves all fashions, all habits, it makes the world stage appear diverse; and human nature shows consistency on the world stage. It establishes everywhere a few basic principles: the land is the same everywhere, but the fruits grown are different." (Note: [French] Voltaire, "The Theory of Customs—On the Spirit and Customs of The Peoples and the History from Charlemagne to Louis XIII," Vol. II, The Commercial Press, 1997, p. 481.) "Religion, superstition, good or bad laws, strange customs, all vary." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. 1, The Commercial Press, 1995, p. 52.) And the power of human nature and customs is enormous, and the law is pale and powerless in the face of human nature and the customs and habits of all nationalities. Legislation should reflect the natural requirements of the customs and habits of a certain society, and secular legislators should not promulgate laws under the guise of divine revelation or dictation. Those natural laws that embody human reason are formed on the basis of human nature and are the basis of all political laws in the human world. This natural law embodies man's orientation towards normal order, "which secretly inspires mankind and prevents the complete destruction of mankind." This is a dynamic of nature, it is constantly restoring its power; it is the code that forms the laws of the nations. Because of it, people respect the law and the judges." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 479.) ）

From this, Voltaire further analyzed the historical differences in laws and customs in Eastern and Western societies, and even believed that the character of the Eastern peoples was better than that of the Western nations (Note: See Voltaire: The Theory of Customs, Vol. II, p. 479). ）。 He refuted the great misunderstanding of Chinese traditional customs and etiquette by Europeans, pointing out that Europeans frivolously say that they worship idols because of the ritual custom of kneeling Chinese, which is contradictory. The great misunderstanding of Chinese etiquette gave rise to the European custom of judging Chinese by their standards, thus bringing the European paranoid view of the door to the world. Voltaire was amazed by the wisdom of the Orientals, arguing that although the Orientals did not have delicate warmth, they were scattered and disorderly, but "the Orientals flashed the light of wisdom, and they used words to describe, although the figurative images were often large and inappropriate and incoherent, and one could also see excellence in them." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Middle Volume, The Commercial Press, 1997, p. 218.) According to Voltaire's view, the customs, habits, and laws of the various peoples and countries in the East and the West are different, and "although the customs, customs, laws, and changes of various countries have the same roots and purposes, they are very different, and they constitute a picture of the world." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 453.) "The people of all countries do not govern themselves according to the same model." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 133.) Comparing the two major civilization systems of the East and the West, Voltaire concluded: "No matter which civilization we talk about in Asia, we can say that it was ahead of us, and we have now surpassed it." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 107.) In the course of the intercourse between the peoples and cultures of the East and the West, monarchs or churches of some European countries sent their emissaries or missionaries to the East, and these people brought many messages, hearsay, and materials to the Europeans after returning home. Voltaire advocated a skeptical attitude toward these oriental anecdotes written by Europeans (Note: Cf. Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, pp. 2-3; Treatise on Customs II, pp. 19-20). But the historical data on the art and science of the East should be taken seriously and should become "our main study." (Note: See Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 2.) In Voltaire's view, a historic turning point in Europe's beginning to surpass Asia was the Great Discovery of Geography and the subsequent overseas colonial expansion of Europeans. The great geographical discovery in the early modern period was a major event in the history of human civilization. It has had an immeasurable and profound impact on both the East and the West. Voltaire analyzed with keen eyes the unique role of this major historical event in the process of ethnic and cultural exchanges between the East and the West: "Da · This voyage of Gamma changed trade in the Old World" ;(note: Voltaire: The Theory of Customs, Vol. II, p. 7. Columbus's "Discovery of the New World is undoubtedly a first-class event on our planet, for until then half of the earth had been ignorant of the other half, and any great deeds to date were dwarfed by this new initiative." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 27.)

Voltaire focused on the study of the social conditions in pre-modern Asia, and believed that in the long process of historical evolution, traditional Asian societies formed their own unique forms of political domination. He did not believe the claims of European missionaries about Genghis Khan's authoritarian rule, stating: "Monks who traveled to Tatar territories in the 13th century wrote that Genghis Khan and his descendants exercised dictatorial rule over their Tatars. But can one believe that some conquerors with swords and their leaders who divide the spoils equally with their leaders, some stout and sturdy, free-spirited, and some who dwell in the uncertain, who sleep in the snow in winter, and who sleep in the dew in the summer, will allow the chiefs chosen in the wilderness to treat themselves as if they were horses that serve as their mounts and food? This is not the nature of the peoples of the North." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 2, p. 60.) Voltaire also disagreed with Montesquieu's view of the Eastern view of the political system, pointing out: "Montesquieu, the author of On the Spirit of the Law, said that there is no republican form of government in Asia. But many nomadic and Arab tribes of the Tatars formed a migratory republic." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. II, p. 478.) At the same time, Voltaire also analyzed the characteristics of the asian social hierarchy, arguing that there was a clear difference between the aristocratic system of Asian and European societies in this regard: "There is no hierarchy in Asia similar to the European aristocracy. Anywhere in the East there is no system of dividing citizens into different hierarchies with hereditary titles, immunity, and rights derived solely from birth. The Tatars seem to be the only people with faint traces of this system. In Turkey, Persia, India, and China, there is no such aristocratic hierarchy that is similar to the main characteristics of the various European monarchies." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, pp. 477-478.) ）

Among the Asian countries, Voltaire pays the most attention to China. In the depths of his heart, there is a strong "Chinese complex". (Note: The famous contemporary sinologist Yasuda Park believes that Voltaire was a central figure in the group of "Chinese fever" scholars in the 18th century French Enlightenment era, who lived in the middle of the century and was the most enthusiastic, energetic, and tenacious "Chinese fever" scholar. See [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, The Commercial Press, 2000, p. 652. He gave a high appraisal of the ancient Chinese civilization with Confucianism as the ontology, regarded China as the wisest and most civilized nation in the world, and believed that Chinese civilization has a long and far-reaching historical origin, "this country has a glorious history of more than 4,000 years, and its laws, customs, language and even clothing have not changed significantly." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 207.) He gave Chinese civilization a special place in the process of world history, and even believed that world history began with Chinese history. China's oldest and most authoritative classic, the Five Classics, "deserves respect and is recognized as superior to all books that account the origins of other peoples because they contain no miracles, prophecies, or even the slightest political tricks of the founders of other countries." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 209.) In Voltaire's view, the essential stipulation of Chinese civilization is an ethical civilization. In China, "ethics is the primary science." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 76.) Confucianism founded by Confucius is not a religion in the Western sense, but an ethical maxim. Confucius "does not innovate and does not make new rites; he is not a divinely inspired person, nor is he a prophet." He was a wise official who taught ancient law. We sometimes inappropriately [call his doctrine 'Confucianism', but in fact he has no religion, his religion is the religion of all emperors and ministers, the religion of the sages. Confucius only admonished people with morality, but did not preach any Upanishads." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 77.) Voltaire was deeply attracted by the image of Confucius written by the Jesuits, and like Father Kinnigge, Father Duhad and others, he praised Confucius with great admiration, believing that "he was only a sage, so Chinese regarded him only as a saint." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 219.) See also Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, pp. 66-70. Thus, in China, Confucius enjoyed all the honors, which was "the honor of a man who, on the question of the gods, put forward the most holy view that human reason can form." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 219.) Voltaire recounts in the Philosophical Dictionary that he wrote the following four lines under the statue of Confucius to express his respect for the sage. "He was the only agent of good reason, never confused the world, but illuminated the way, he spoke only in the tone of a sage and never in the tone of a prophet, but he was considered a sage, even throughout the country." —Quoted from [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 703-7 04. ）

Confucius's Confucianism profoundly influenced the character of Chinese legal civilization. What Chinese most deeply understood, most carefully cultivated, and most committed to perfecting is morality and law. Filial piety to their fathers is the foundation of the nation. In China, patriarchy has never weakened, and a son must obtain the consent of all his relatives, friends, and government officials before he can sue his father. The civil officials of a province and a county are called parent officials, and the emperor is the father of a country. This kind of thinking is deeply rooted in people's hearts, and this vast country is formed into a big family. (Note: See Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 216.) Some scholars believe that the social structure of traditional China based on blood and kinship is very attractive to Voltaire. When ertai discusses China's national character of emphasizing humanity and morality, he has actually touched on the important role played by Confucianism in Chinese society. See Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, p. 105. The laws and tranquility of China's vast empire are based on the respect of the elders of the younger generations, which is both natural and sacred, and this reverence is combined with the respect of the earliest ethical master Confucius. (Note: See Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV, The Commercial Press, 1982, p. 595.) Therefore, the legal culture of traditional China has a distinct ethical character. Unlike the West and other Asian countries such as India, China's laws are secular. Chinese did not create the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and their earliest legislators formulated moral principles that encouraged people to accumulate virtue and do good deeds, and forced people to obey these moral principles with harsh punishments. It is true that Chinese law does not speak of punishment or reward after death; Chinese are reluctant to affirm what they do not know. This difference between them and all the great civilized nations is striking. The doctrine of hell is powerful, but governments that Chinese never adopt it. They are only satisfied with encouraging people to be devout and upright. They believe that a correct political system, which has always been practised, will play a greater role than some public opinion that is likely to be attacked; people are more afraid of the existing code than of future laws." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 78.) "In other countries, the law is used to punish crimes, but in China, it is more useful to praise good deeds. If there is a rare noble act, it will be well known and spread throughout the province. Officials must report to the emperor, who will erect plaques for those who deserve to be commended. (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 217.) In ancient China, law was also combined with everyday habits and manners of etiquette to regulate people's behavior and form an organic social order. Chinese endless variety of etiquette hinders social interaction, but these rituals can establish restraint and integrity in words and deeds throughout the nation, making the people's customs both solemn and elegant. When certain disputes and unhappiness arise, the parties often fight with each other and ask for forgiveness in order to cause trouble to the other party, so as to solve the problem calmly. (Note: See Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 217.) Voltaire realized that a Chinese legal culture based on moral principles has a strong assimilation force. Genghis Khan's family established rule in the Central Plains, but the culture of the Tatars was assimilated by Chinese culture. "The Tatars found the laws of the defeated so perfect that they also obeyed them in order to consolidate their rule. In particular, they took care to retain a law that no one may serve as governor or judge in the province where he or she was born. What a great law! And it is equally suitable for the losers." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. II, p. 89.) Similarly, after the Manchus entered the customs, although the Han chinese were forced to adopt the Manchu hairstyle, "because the Manchus adopted the laws, customs, and religions of the Han people, the two ethnic groups soon became one nation." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. II, p. 465.) ）

For a long time, the form of government and its operation in ancient China attracted widespread interest among Europeans, and Voltaire was particularly appreciative. The ideal form of government in his mind was monarchy (not absolutism). The Chinese form of government, characterized by "benevolent government and rule by virtue," which Confucians preach, is in line with Voltaire's ideal model of "enlightened monarchy." (Note: See Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, pp. 140-143.) However, some scholars believe that Voltaire's praises of Chinese-style moral rule and paternalistic rule that combine morality and politics are exaggerated and exaggerated. This political ideal of Voltaire was soon obsolete by the development of French Enlightenment ideas. When contemporary Voltaire later turned to a British-style democratic constitutionalism, China's paternalistic virtueism lost its appeal. See Xin Jianfei: The Chinese View of the World, Xuelin Publishing House, 1991, p. 205. From this, he analyzed the form of imperial rule in traditional China, disagreed with some European missionaries and Montesquieu's views on China's autocracy, and pointed out: "Travelers, especially missionaries, think that what is seen everywhere is an authoritarian system. These people judge everything from the superficial phenomenon: when they see some people bowing, they think they are slaves, and the one who receives the people's bowing must be the absolute master of the lives and property of 150 million people, and his will alone is the law. But that's not the case, and that's what we're going to talk about. We need only point out here that in the earliest days of the empire, people were allowed to write down on a long table in the imperial palace what they considered to be reprehensible in the government, a rule that had been implemented in the 2nd century BC during the reign of Emperor Wen of Han; in peacetime, the opinions of the government had always had the power of law. This important fact overturns the general and vague rebuke of the oldest country in the world in Montesquieu's Treatise on the Spirit of the Law." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 216.) Voltaire praised the administrative mechanisms of ancient China, saying that China was much luckier than the forms of political rule in India, Persia, and Turkey. Here, "everything is decided by the subordinate yamen of the first level, and officials must pass several rigorous examinations before they can be hired." In China, these yamen are the institutions that govern everything. The six ministries belonged to the heads of the imperial governments; the officials were in charge of the provincial officials; the household department was in charge of finance; the ceremonial department was in charge of etiquette, science, and art; the military department was in charge of war; the punishment department was in charge of prisons; and the ministry of works was in charge of public works. The results of the affairs handled by these ministries are reported to a supreme body. There are 44 subordinate institutions permanently in Beijing under the six ministries, and officials in each province and city have an auxiliary yamen. (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 460.) Therefore, in Voltaire's view, mankind certainly could not imagine a better government than the political form of China, which was not the authoritarian government that Montesquieu thought. "Under this administrative system, it is impossible for the emperor to exercise arbitrariness. General decrees came from the Emperor, but because of such government institutions, the Emperor could not do anything without consulting the law-savvy and elected people of insight. People must kneel before the emperor like gods, and the slightest disrespect to him will be punished for the crime of offending Tianyan, all of which certainly does not mean that this is an authoritarian and dictatorial government. Dictatorships are such that the monarch may deprive his subjects of their property or life without any reason, without following a certain form, by his own will, without breaking the law. So if there was ever a country where people's lives, reputations, and property were protected by law, it was the Chinese Empire. The more institutions that enforce these laws, the less arbitrary the administrative system becomes. Although the monarch may sometimes abuse his power to harm the minority he knows, he cannot abuse his power to harm the majority of the people he does not know and who are protected by law. (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, pp. 460-461.) According to Lawrence Cradle, Voltaire praised China's traditional political system, distinguishing between absolutism and tyranny, and stressed that although examples of tyranny can be found in China, this phenomenon is rare "in this happy country". See History of Eastern Society in Western European Writings, translated in Studies on the Origins of Marxism, Vol. 15, p. 103. In Voltaire's mind, China was an admirable country, where the emperor was supposed to be the "chief philosopher," and his edicts were full of ethical teachings and doctrines; the emperor of China was also the "chief high priest" and "the first farmer." From this, Voltaire even affirmed the views of some European missionaries about the Yongzheng Emperor, praising the emperor, pointing out: "This emperor is the wisest and most generous of the emperors in the past. He was always concerned with alleviating the suffering of the poor and making them labor, and he strictly obeyed the law, suppressed the ambitions and tricks of the monks, protected the peace and prosperity of the country, and rewarded all useful skills, especially the cultivation of the land. Under his rule, all the public buildings, the main roads of communication, and the canals connecting the rivers of the great empire were repaired, and the works were grand and economical. In this respect, only the ancient Romans were comparable." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. II, p. 466.) According to Yasuda's analysis, an important reason why Voltaire praised Yongzheng as the most virtuous emperor was that he issued an edict shutting Christian missionaries out of The Gate of China. See [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 746-753. In Voltaire's pen, the ancient Chinese government's construction of public facilities was closely related to its patriarchal rule and governance philosophy. "It is precisely because the whole country is the fundamental law that safeguarding the public interest is regarded as the primary responsibility in China than in other places." Therefore, the emperor and the government have always been extremely concerned about building bridges and paving roads, digging canals, and facilitating farming and handicrafts. (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 216.) ）

Of course, Voltaire also saw the shortcomings or weaknesses in the ancient Chinese civilization and cultural system, believing that nature gave Chinese a spirit of integrity and wisdom, but did not give them spiritual power. For example, in science and technology, "Chinese always surpass other peoples in terms of ethics, but other sciences have made little progress." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 92.) He sent out a series of questions: Since the Chinese were so advanced in such a distant ancient time, why did they stay at this stage? Why is it that in China, astronomy is so ancient, but its achievements are so limited? If China is constantly committed to various techniques and sciences, why has there been little progress? Here, Voltaire seems to have noticed the stagnation of traditional Chinese social development, arguing that Chinese had an incredible reverence for what had been handed down from his ancestors, which may have hindered the progress of Chinese society. (Note: See Voltaire, Vol. 1, pp. 215, 216, 228; Treatise on Customs II, pp. 91-94.) The famous contemporary French sinologist Yasuda Pu pointed out: "Voltaire, like many of his contemporaries, praised the ethical and political qualities of the Chinese government and customs, which in this way surpassed the European institutions and customs. But Voltaire, like many of his time, felt with great regret that Chinese failed to develop art, science and technology as advanced as Westerners." See History of The Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, p. 727. ）

Unlike his attitude of praising Chinese civilization and legal culture, Voltaire did not give more affirmation to the political and legal culture of other Asian countries, but held a critical stance. In "On Customs," Voltaire also conducted a more in-depth discussion of the political and legal culture of other peoples and countries in Asia. According to his view, although the Indians may have been one of the first peoples to assemble into a national entity, the religious color of Indian civilization and culture is extremely strong, which has a great influence on the formation and development of the legal culture of this society, and in a certain sense, this influence is decisive. Brahmin monks ruled India. "Since the early Brahmins were both kings and sheikhs, their religion could only be based on universal reason. This is not the case in countries where the sheikh is not united with the king. In this case, the teaching office, which had previously been held only by the head of the family, became a separate profession, and the worship of God became an industry, and in order to control this profession, it often required power, deceit and atrocities." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 234.) The practice of self-immolation by Indian women is perhaps the most reflective of the basic characteristics of India's religious legal culture. "Human beings have wise laws, but at the same time there are always perverse customs. For example, women set themselves on fire on the body of their husbands, a sign of chastity and loyalty, a custom that has existed in India since ancient times. (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, vol. 1, p. 231.) Voltaire made it clear that ancient Indian political rule was characterized by authoritarianism, with authoritarian power concentrated in the hands of Mughal emperors, but this power was based on force and could only be maintained when commanding the army. Thus, "this authoritarian power can destroy everything, but ultimately it will destroy itself." (Note: Voltaire, Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, pp. 458-459.) Unlike the rule of law, authoritarian power is extremely uncertain and difficult to obtain a stable form. "It is not a form of government, but a form of overthrowing any government." It is based on the individual's will, not on laws that guarantee his or her existence. When the behemoth could no longer raise his arms, he fell to the ground. His wreckage produced several small tyrants. Only during the period of rule of law can the state regain its stable form." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 459.) ）

Voltaire also examined ancient Japanese society and its legal culture, arguing that although "the Japanese seem to be native to Japan." Their laws, religions, customs, and languages are no different from those of China" (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 14). However, Japanese culture has a historical relationship with Chinese Confucian culture, confucius's teachings were widely spread in this empire, and the emperor honored Confucius alone and had no other religion. For a long time, the Japanese government adopted a policy of alternating tolerance and harshness toward the spread of Christianity in Japan, so that by the end of the 16th century, the whole of Japan had almost become a Christian kingdom. In 1637, in order to prevent The Christian conspiracy against the Emperor, the Emperor issued an edict prohibiting the spread of Christian doctrine, stipulating that no foreigners would be accepted in the Empire and that all Christians in the country would be imprisoned. "Whoever wants to spread the teachings of Jesus in Japan risks losing their heads." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 13.) Contrary to the attitude toward Christianity, "Japan has never persecuted Confucianism, although Confucianism is derived from a people that the Japanese are jealous of and often at war with." (Note: Voltaire: Treatise on Customs, Vol. II, p. 468.) But it seems that Japan abused Confucius's teachings even more than China. For example, in the minds of Japanese people, suicide is a moral act as long as it does not harm society; as a result, suicide is commonplace in Japan. Obviously, this is an arrogant and violent habit. According to Voltaire, the form of government in ancient Japan was similar to that of the Muslim caliphate and modern Rome. The hereditary system of the unity of the patriarch and the emperor should indisputably date back to 660 BC. However, by the end of the 16th century, gradually, the laity shared the government and completely controlled the government, but did not dare to abolish the name of the lord and the lineage of the master. The emperor known as "Neri" is an eternally revered idol, and the emperor's shogun is the real emperor, who respectfully protects the emperor in a noble prison. Formally, the head of religion was also the head of the empire. In Japan, this form of political rule lasts much longer than any other people in the world.

2. Quesnai's View of Chinese Legal Civilization

The theoretical expression of the French Enlightenment in the economic field in the eighteenth century was the formation and development of the Physiocrats. The French school of phylogenetics is considered to be one of the founders of modern political economy in the West, and this school is represented by Quesnai. (Note: In their writings on the development of modern Western economic thought, two French scholars explicitly pointed out that Quesnay and his disciples were considered the true founders of the science of political economy. It is true that some French economists very rashly ceded this title to Adam Smith, but economists in other countries still returned it to France, and probably belonged to France permanently. It is only the physiocrats who did first grasp the concept of a unified social science, that is, they were the first to realize that all social things are bound and connected by necessary laws, and that individuals and governments, once they know these laws, will be at their disposal. Thus, the Physiocrats were the founders of the earliest economic "schools" worthy of the name. See [French] Charles Kidd and Charles Lister: A History of Economic Theory, Vol. I, The Commercial Press, 1986, pp. 14-15. Marx undoubtedly agreed with this view. He pointed out in The Theory of Surplus Value: "The great merit of the Physiocrats is that they analyse capital from the perspective of the bourgeoisie. It is this feat. Make them the true originators of modern political economy." See The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, vol. 26, vol. 1, p. 15. This school of thought has complex ideological origins, among which China's influence cannot be ignored. (Note: French economists Tude and Lisder argue that the formulas and terms in Quesnay's Economic Table are as sophisticated as the old Chinese script; the Physiocratist school has a lot of Chinese dogmatism.) See Gide and Lister: A History of Economic Theory, vol. 1, p. 51. In addition, mainland scholar Tan Min has examined in detail the profound influence of ancient Chinese political and economic thought on the Physiocrats, holding that the views or propositions of this school of natural order, the "Economic Table," laissez-faire, physiism, pure products, and the single tax on land all contain profound Chinese ideological and cultural spirit, thus confirming that the theoretical origins of the Physiocrats are in China, emphasizing that "in the French Physiocrats' economic theory system, the ideological elements from The Chinese origins have penetrated almost all aspects of this theoretical system." See Chinese Origins of the French Theory of Heavy Agriculture, Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1992, p. 356. Unlike the mercantilists of the previous period, which regarded money as the greatest wealth of the state, the Physiocrats emphasized that the most legitimate and noble wealth of the state was obtained from agricultural labor. Proceeding from the practical needs of France, an agricultural country on the European continent in the early modern period, they conducted an in-depth investigation of the important position of agricultural production in the national economic system, giving land and means of subsistence an unusually prominent position. In Quesnay's view, whether agriculture is prosperous or not is a major matter related to the survival of the country and the royal government. The decline of agriculture will not only impoverish the cultivators, but the landowners and the government will be the first to be destroyed, in which case the state itself cannot sustain itself. Therefore, he cautioned: "Kings and people must not forget that the land is the only source of wealth, and only agriculture can increase wealth." Because the increase of wealth can ensure the increase of the population, with people and wealth, agriculture can flourish, commerce can expand, industrial activity can be carried out, and wealth can be increased permanently and continuously. The success of all branches of state administration depends on this rich source. (Note: [French] François Quesnay: "General Principles of Economic Domination in Agrarian Countries", in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnay, The Commercial Press, 1979, p. 333.) Proceeding from the above understanding, the Physiocrats advocated that the state's economic policies and laws should be conducive to the development and prosperity of agriculture, and opposed the exploitation of indigenous cultivators. Quesnay believed that tax systems and policies in favour of agriculture and farmers should be introduced. This is because the monarch's taxation is levied from the cultivator, and if the tax is too heavy and the profits of the cultivator are taken away, the income of the landowner will be reduced, leading to the decline of agriculture, and thus the weakening of the state. Therefore, for the kingdom to prosper and become strong, the government must adopt a reasonable tax policy to support and reward cultivators. Here, Quesnay proposes an important yardstick for judging the rationality of the state's behavior, namely: "In order for wealth and population to increase, people must be convinced that they can be free and have their own wealth." If people lose their security, rights, and property, they will not cherish their monarchs or their homeland. Even if there are people who are willing to live in poverty and stay at home, they are not good for the country.". "The usual cause of a country's demise is the abuse of power and tyranny of the government." (Note: Quesnai: "Population Theory", in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnai, p. 132.) The main reason for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire was not so much extravagance as it was the excessive taxation levied on the provinces in order to maintain this extravagant life, which destroyed the economic life of the provinces, aroused the anger of the people, and then the provinces and the empire itself underwent a revolution caused by the heavy and heavy taxes of the government. Quesnay noted that in places such as the Netherlands, where trade was the source of the nation's subsistence, autocracy undermined agriculture; in some barbaric countries, such as Turkey, trade transactions were carried out mainly by shipping, caravans, and correspondence, which favored the cities to the detriment of the countryside, where tyrants and their representatives who shared the government were rampant, and it was precisely because of this that the countryside became deserted.

In China, however, the situation is very different. The heavy agricultural schools represented by Quesnai praised Chinese civilization endlessly, and especially highly praised China's agricultural-oriented national policy. (Note: In Yasuda's view, in the 18th century, it was the physiocrats who praised the economy of Chinese as a model for europe as a whole.) They wrote a series of works evaluating Chinese civilization, such as Vauban's "Plan for Replacing The Poll Tax, Indirect Tax, and Tariff from One Province to another" (1707), Siruet's "On the Basic Ideas of Government and Ethics in Chinese" (1731), and Quesnay's "On Chinese Absolutism" (1767). See History of The Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 770-772. Durgo wrote a special "Collection of China Problems", which involves 52 issues, which not only shows that his understanding of China has reached a considerable breadth and depth, but also attaches great importance to China's economic and agricultural government. His book "An Investigation into the Formation and Distribution of Wealth" has been called the preface to the "Collection of Chinese Problems". (Note: See Zhu Jianjin, "Where Is Eastern Society Going: Marx's Theory of Oriental Society," Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, 1996, pp. 42-43; Tan Min: The Chinese Origins of the French Physiocrats Doctrine, pp. 90-99.) Citing China as an example, Quesnai reveals the mechanism of the connection between agriculture and politics: "Only peoples engaged in agriculture can form a stable and lasting state, and such a state is capable of solid and comprehensive management, subject to the unchanging system of the laws of nature, so that on such occasion agriculture itself forms the basis of these countries, prescribes and determines their system of domination, and becomes a source of wealth capable of satisfying the needs of the people; but the development and decline of agriculture itself necessarily determines the form of rule." (Note: Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnai, p. 406.) Quesnay regarded China as the ideal country for the establishment of a country based on agriculture in his mind, and regarded China's political and legal system that promoted agricultural development as an ideal system that conformed to the laws of nature and reflected the natural order. (Note: Quesnay actively advocated learning from China, advising King Louis XV of France to emulate the "pro-cultivation" of the Chinese emperor in order to promote the development of French agriculture.) As a result, like Voltaire, he also gained the reputation of "Confucius of Europe". See Meng Hua: Voltaire and Confucius, p. 38. At the instigation of the Physiocrats, China became a model of civilization and even a model for any enlightened politics and any rational way of economic activity. (Note: See Yasuda Park, A History of the Westward Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 773-774.) What runs through the chinese civilization is the so-called "natural order." In Quesnay's doctrine, "natural order" is a fundamental concept of domination. Under the influence of the modern trend of rational natural law, Quesnay highlighted the lofty status of natural laws, natural order, and natural rights, emphasized the need to formulate a legal system that conforms to the requirements of natural laws and natural order, and establish a state capable of guaranteeing natural rights. He believed that in the supreme laws of nature, there were the fundamental principles of the socio-economic order. "The nation should obviously be guided by the general laws of the natural order that constitute the most perfect management. For the knowledge that a great politician should possess, it is not enough to study the law of man-made people (Jwrisprudence humaine). Those who aspire to administrative positions must also study the natural order that is most beneficial to the people in the making up of society. It is all the more important to combine the practical and useful knowledge gained by the experience of the people with the summarization of the general science of management, and to make the best laws to be strictly observed by a regime that proves enlightened, for the security of all human beings and for the maximum prosperity of society." (Note: Quesnai: "General Norms of Economic Domination in Agrarian Countries," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnay, pp. 332-333.) The essence of the physiocratist system lies in its concept of natural order. In a broader sense, physiology is a science of natural order. The Physiocrats believe that human society is permeated with the principles of the "natural order" and does not require any external help from written laws; if any new legislation is needed, it should only be a copy of the unwritten law of nature, and of course, it must not be considered anarchist. See Charles Kidd and Charles Lister: A History of Economic Theory, Vol. I, pp. 16-20. Quesnay analyzed that the basic laws of society are the natural laws that are most favorable to mankind, and these natural laws reflect the normal tendency of all phenomena in the natural sphere that is most favorable to mankind, and are therefore the actual laws on which the management of the whole state is based; they also reflect the normal tendency of all moral activities in the natural field, which is most beneficial to mankind, and therefore the moral law on which the management of the whole state is the basis. The content of these basic laws is drawn directly from the highest theorems of fairness, good and evil, and they exist in the hearts of men, as the light that teaches them and governs their conscience; these unshakable basic laws of society lead people to unite to form a society, and through the correct combination of labor and personal interests, to form the moral and political bodies of society, to teach people to promote public welfare with the greatest achievements; these natural laws, although not created by man, are the work of any human society What the regime must obey, and the obedience and observance of these natural laws and fundamental laws, must be supported by the "protective regime" established by society. The basic duty of the "protective regime" is to formulate effective laws that are compatible with the natural laws regulating the state system, to establish the order of state management, to ensure compliance with the laws of nature, and thus to manage society more effectively. These effective laws should be the embodiment of the laws of nature, which require legislators and applicators to have a broad knowledge and careful thinking in order to regulate the natural process of the reproduction of the country's annual wealth. Other forms of politics, such as the autocratic tyrant, the aristocracy, the community of interests of the monarch and the nobility, the democracy of the common people, the hybrid form of the combination of the three factors of the monarchy, the nobility and democracy, the Supreme Court that focuses on equitable distribution, the theocracy, and so on, are extremely harmful forms of rule that should be avoided. The basic laws of these societies constitute the natural rights of man. Natural rights are embodied in the natural order and the just order, and can only exist in all interlaced relations of men, and people can attain them only by relying on the light of reason that distinguishes them from the beasts. The natural rights of every individual should be protected by a sound government, and in particular the ownership of immovable and movable property must be guaranteed, since the security of ownership is the main basis of the socio-economic order, and if ownership is not guaranteed, the land will be abandoned and not cultivated. A country guided by the light of knowledge will not destroy this law of the Emperor to which all human political power must be subordinated; the basis for the perfection of the basic system of society is based on this natural law and natural order; the effective law which stipulates the natural rights of citizens, which is completely subordinate to the basic natural laws of society, belongs only to the unified power above all different special interests, and cannot belong to any other person. (Note: See Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China", in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnai, pp. 396-411; "Natural Rights", in Anthology of Quesnai Economic Writings, pp. 296-297, 306-307.) ）

It follows that Quesnay presents us with an ideal picture of the political and legal life of the country, and according to him, the kingdom that meets the requirements of the above-mentioned basic laws of natural society is the Chinese Empire. Quesnay even believes that what he describes in a systematic and detailed way is "the theory of China that can be the model of all countries." (Note: Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnay, p. 396.) In other words, this is Quesnay's ideal theoretical paradigm for the state system of the Chinese Empire. Quesnay's insight seems to have come from the heart. Unlike smith's attitude, which we will see below, Quesnay was not skeptical of the narrative material of European historians and travelers about the Orient and China, but affirmed that it was "perfectly credible." (Note: See Quesnai, "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnai, p. 396.) However, the title of his book, titled "China's Autocracy," tends to give people the illusion that Quesnay and his physiocrats were propagators of authoritarian politics. In fact, in Quesnay, there is a distinction between "legitimate" and "illegal" monarchs, which gives rise to the distinction between "legal absolutism" and "dictatorial absolutism." The absolutism advocated by Quesnay and his Physiocrats is not an authoritarian dictatorship, but a kind of "legal absolutism," that is, legal restraint or legal despotism. (Note: Yasuda says that some people, because they misunderstand the title of Quesnay's book On Chinese Absolutism, sometimes miscalculate physiocrat scholars as supporters of authoritarian politics.) In fact, if one reads the contents of this book, one will understand that the political ideas of Quesnai and his Physiocrats are in no way accomplices of the autocratic system; the "absolutism" here is actually "legitimate absolutism," which has nothing in common with either the autocracy or the theory of the autocratic monarch. Yasuda went on to point out that in the Age of Enlightenment, when people were obsessed with freedom, the title of Quesnay's work did have a certain provocative appearance, and even Tocqueville and Rousseau had a certain misunderstanding. In particular, Rousseau also objected to the interpretation of "legitimate absolutism", claiming that he neither appreciated nor even heard of the so-called "legitimate absolutism", and that it made no sense to combine these two contradictory words. Yasuda's basic judgment of Rousseau's attitude is that rousseau is not so much puzzled by the concept of "legitimate authoritarianism" as a reflection of Rousseau's broader prejudice against China. See History of The Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 774-775. This "legitimate absolutism", which originates from the "natural order" of human society, emphasizes that the political power of the state is by no means the arbitrary and arbitrary nature of tyrants, and should be the maintenance and guarantee of people's ownership and freedom. According to the interpretation of some scholars, "legal absolutism" means and only means "legal despotism." (Note: Quesnay's idea of distinguishing between "legitimate absolutism" and "authoritarian despotism" was later further developed by Condorcet.) See Lawrence Clade, "A History of Eastern Society in Western European Writings," translated in Marxist Sources of Study Series, Vol. 15, p. 118. Therefore, the emphasis of this concept is not on "despotism" but on "law"; that is to say, everything depends on the legal idea that everyone recognizes as having authoritarian power. (Note: [French] Leon Chenis, The Political Thought of the Physiosaurs, Paris, Artur Rousseau, 1914; see Yasuda Park, A History of The Westward Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, p. 775.) In Quesnay's view, Chinese authoritarian politics fell into the category of "legal absolutism," which was based on wise and unshakable laws; the emperor enforced these laws and obeyed them prudently, so that the emperor's power was constrained. (Note: Quesnay disagreed with Montesquieu's view of China's political system, arguing that Chinese rule was not dictatorial authoritarianism but legitimate authoritarianism.) Quesnay's classification of absolutism was later revived in Alexander's treatise on India and in Hegel's treatise on Asia. See Lawrence Clade, "A History of Eastern Society in The Writings of Western Europe," translated in Treatise on the Origins of Marxism, Vol. 15, p. 108. The political system of the vast Chinese Empire, which was based on scientific and natural rules, was the result of the development of science and natural laws. The Chinese Empire was good at administrative management, and the important thing was the Confucian learning of Confucius, who relied on the form and rules of governing the country. The concept of the "state of nature" is in line with Confucius's idea of "Mandate of Heaven". Chinese was deeply influenced and educated by Confucius's thought, so that only Chinese in the world legislated only to implement the "state of nature" or "Mandate of Heaven"; China's prosperity and stability are due to the codification of natural laws. (Note: Yasuda even asserted that if this doctor of Madame Pompadour (i.e., Quesnai) did not ultimately get this idea of the "state of nature" from Confucius's book? The "state of nature" became the norm for any legislation and for any political, economic and social activity. If not from China, where did he find a people whose safety depended on the laws of its agriculture and seasonal currents? If not in China, where do you see examples of the need for dikes and irrigation to work together? See History of The Westward Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, p. 777. Thus, in China, "with the help of learning, the first stage of the state is formed, which is well suited to leading the people through the brilliance of reason, and subordinating the government to the natural and indisputable laws that establish the basis of the social system." (Note: Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnay, p. 419.) China's ruling system is based on natural law, and the pursuit of natural laws and natural order has become a basic goal of their legitimate management. In China, "the emperors always regarded observing the ancient rites and performing them as one of their main responsibilities. As the chiefs of a nation, they are emperors who rule over the people, teachers who teach the people, and priests who perform sacrifices." (Note: See He Zhaowu and Liu Jilin, eds., Impressions of China: World Celebrities on Chinese Culture, Vol. 1, Guangxi Normal University Press, 2001, p. 48.) In this vast empire, free whistle-blowing, frequent reporting of abuses of power by officials in government briefings, frequent examination of government activities in order to enable all provinces to obey the law and oppose the abuse of power—this is an important condition for a stable and confident government; Chinese laws are based on ethical principles, ethics and politics constitute the only science in China, and the ruler's decrees cannot violate conventions and public welfare; here, derived from the "natural order." The political order will undoubtedly form some coercive laws, but these laws are the embodiment of natural laws, and judicial activities cannot deviate from the just legal system; throughout the empire, property ownership is quite secure, and children inherit the inheritance of their parents and relatives according to the natural order of succession.

Therefore, through the example of the Chinese Empire, Quesnay further confirmed the inherent necessity of state rule, government management, and legal operation to follow the laws of nature and embody the requirements of "natural order." He pointed out: "Isn't it clear that the laws which establish the natural order are eternal and indestructible, and that the chaos in domination is only the result of the destruction of these eternal laws?" Didn't the Chinese Empire, by abiding by the laws of nature, be able to grow in age, territory, and prosper? Won't those nations that rule by the will of man and have to conquer man by weapons not be regarded as barbaric by the chinese nation, which has a large number of people, from a completely rooted position? Isn't this vast empire, subject to the natural order, an example of a stable and enduring government? It proves that sometimes some governments are unsustainable for no other reason, no other reason, but only because of the capriciousness of the people themselves. But can't it be said that the Chinese government was able to maintain this fortunate and enduring unifo rmifie only because the empire was less invaded by its neighbors than some other countries? But wasn't it also once occupied? Has its vast land not been divided and several states formed? It follows from this that its government was able to maintain itself for a long time not because of local circumstances, but because of its essentially stable order." (Note: Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnai, p. 420.) Although Quesnay did not believe that China's political system was not perfect, he always believed in his mind that China's political rule and legal mechanism were closer to an ideal political model than in Europe and other countries. Therefore, Quesnay gave advice to the rulers of Europe, especially the French king, and advised them to learn from China's way of governing, stressing that "a consolidated and prosperous government should follow the example of the Chinese Empire and regard the profound study and long-term universal study of the natural laws that are the basis of the social system as the main goal of its own work of governance." (Note: Quesnai: "The Authoritarian System in China," in Selected Economic Writings of Quesnay, p. 406.) Obviously, an important reason why Quesnay admired Chinese political and legal civilization so much that it was inevitable that there would be excessive and beautiful insights, and some of them even did not correspond to the truth of history, in addition to his admiration for Confucius from the bottom of his heart, was the need for realpolitik struggle, and China's Confucian inherent righteousness and government governance style became a powerful example of the heavy agricultural school represented by Quesnay expressing its political, economic, and social views. (Note: The German scholar Litchwin analyzed that "Quesnay's ardent self-professed belief in China has a clear political goal.") He sought to place the shattered French monarchy on a new and sound (i.e., natural) basis; and hoped that such self-profiling would receive greater attention in an era of Chinese worship. See [de] Litchwin, The Connection between Eighteenth-Century Chinese and European Cultures, The Commercial Press, 1962, p. 97. See also Shi Tongbiao, The Influence of Chinese Legal Culture on the West, Hebei People's Publishing House, 1999, pp. 53-56; Tan Min, The Chinese Origins of the French Physiocrats Doctrine, pp. 99-102. ）

III. Montesquieu's Oriental View of Law Orientation

If Voltaire and Quesnay were the main representatives of the French Enlightenment's tendency toward the East, especially the "China fever" (in Yasuda's words, "friendly people to China"), then Charles Louis Montesquieu (1689-1755) was the representative of the so-called "unfriendly people" who rejected the East and China in general. Voltaire and Montesquieu form the two pillars of this contradictory attitude toward China. (Note: See [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 455-456.) Montesquieu was not only a famous thinker of the French Enlightenment in the 18th century, but also one of the earliest scholars in modern European countries to systematically study the ancient Oriental society and legal culture. Although his writings are not many, their influence is quite extensive, especially "On the Spirit of Law," which is a collection of works, which laid the foundation for the development of modern Western political and legal theory, and also greatly influenced the European people's views on Eastern politics and legal culture. (Note: Some scholars believe that Montesquieu's doctrine, like the Physiocrats, was influenced by Chinese thought, and that his concept of fundamental rationality and the pursuit of natural order were imbued with the imprints of Chinese culture, "just as Montesquieu sought to infiltrate or regulate the 'spirit' or order of law, the physiocrats sought the basic order in economic affairs." See Edmund Whitaker, Schools of Economic Thought, Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1974, p. 110. One of montesquieu's main lines in the study of eastern problems is the grasp of the form of eastern political systems. He inherited the idea of classification of governments from Aristotle onwards, and reformed them to make new interpretations. He distinguished the form of government into three types: republican, monarchical, and absolutist, and held that "the nature of a republican form of government is: the whole or certain families of the people, where they hold the highest power; the nature of the monarchy is that the monarch holds the highest power there, but he exercises this power according to established laws; and the nature of the autocracy is that a single individual governs there according to his will and capricious hobbies." (Note: [French] Charles Louis Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, The Commercial Press, 1961, p. 19.) Of the three types of government described above, Montesquieu's ideal form of government was the British-style constitutional monarchy.

In Montesquieu's view, the form of political rule in the ancient East was basically an autocracy. This assertion greatly influenced the perception of political life in the East by Westerners in that era and for a long time to come. (Note: Some scholars have analyzed the formation and influence of Montesquieu's view of the Eastern polity, and believe that Montesquieu's description of the government of Asia Minor is somewhat imaginatively pieced together from the works of his contemporaries travelers and missionaries. His model of Eastern absolutism was intended to be considered by the French as a negative example, not as a specimen for the systematic interpretation of the principles of the Form of Government in Asia Minor. However, this mode of thought of his had a lasting impact on the field of comparative politics. See M. Sawwell, "A Prehistory of the Marxist Concept of The Mode of Production in Asia", translated in Hao Zhenhua, ed., On the Mode of Production in Asia minor, vol. 1, China Social Science Press, 1981, p. 195. He believed that ancient Eastern society was the unifying world of authoritarianism. The authoritarian state, on the other hand, has neither any basic law nor a defense mechanism for the law. "Because of the nature of authoritarian power, the individual exercising authoritarian rule likewise exercises his power on his behalf with a single individual." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 18.) Therefore, in order to ensure the proper functioning of state affairs, in a country of such a form of government, the establishment of a prime minister is a basic law, and the monarch indulges in the joys of the harem. In an authoritarian state, the nature of the form of government requires absolute obedience; once the will of the monarch is issued, it should be effective, and there is absolutely no such thing as regulation, restriction, conciliation, condition, equivalence, negotiation, or slander. Thus, the principle of authoritarian regimes is terror. "A liberal government can loosen its momentum at will without danger. It sustains itself according to its laws and even its power. But under an autocracy, when the monarch does not raise his arm for a moment, when he destroys those who are in the first place and destroys them immediately, then it is all over, because the dynamics of this government, the terror, no longer exist, so people no longer have protectors." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 26.) Montesquieu specifically analyzed the peculiarities of the autocracy in the legislative field and in judicial activities, arguing that "in an authoritarian state, the law is only the will of the monarch." Even if the monarch is wise, the officials try to obey a will that they do not know, and the officials certainly obey their own will. "Moreover, since the law is only the will of the monarch, and the monarch can only express his will according to what he understands, as a result, there are countless people who express the will for the king, and the will in the same way as the monarch." Finally, since the law is the will of the monarch for a moment, those who express the will on his behalf must also express their will suddenly, like the monarch." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, pp. 66-67.) Thus, in an authoritarian state, the connection between things cannot be explored and foreseen, and the people do not need many laws, and we do not know what laws the legislators can make. "Because all land belongs to the monarch, there are hardly any civil statutes regarding land ownership. Because the monarch has the right to inherit all property, there is no civil statute on inheritance. There are also monarchs of autocratic countries who monopolize trade, which renders all commercial regulations useless. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 74.) Here everything is reduced to reconciling the administration of the political and civil administration with the administration of the monarch's family, with the administration of the state's officials with the administration of the monarch's harem; and a good way to prevent the complete disintegration of the state is to temper the greed of the monarch with some established habits. As for judicial activities under this political system, because the litigants there are treated extremely rudely, and the unfair demands of the litigants are quickly seen because they lack onerous laws to cover up, buffer, or protect them, "there is absolutely no chance of disputes and lawsuits in an authoritarian country." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 75.) I don't know what cases the judge can decide. Even if some cases occur, sometimes the monarch will have to try the case himself, which will inevitably have serious consequences. "If this is the case, the system of government will be destroyed, the middle power of vassals will be eliminated, all procedures in adjudication will cease to exist; terror will envelop the hearts of all, everyone will show a look of panic, trust, honor, fraternity, security and monarchy will cease to exist." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 79.) ）

Based on the above analysis of the characteristics of the autocratic regime, Montesquieu focused on examining the political and legal operation mechanisms of ancient Eastern societies. According to him, the typical form of Turkish government is authoritarianism. (Note: Montesquieu's conclusive significance of the authoritarianism in the political life of the Turks has caused criticism and even foreign protests.) In 1770, Porter, the British Minister Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary in Constantinople, protested against Montesquieu's oversimplification of Turkish absolutism, stating: "As he sees, the monarch's absolutism has eliminated all the legislative provisions of the empire, and if Monsieur Montesquieu opens the Quran, then a chapter on women alone will give him an idea of how personal property is clearly protected by law, how they are not damaged by the power of the Sultan and are above the power of the Sultan." See [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Westward Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, p. 497. The emperor is not restricted by any factor, including his own oath. "The Emperor of Turkey, if his covenant or oath limits his authority, is utterly ineligible in the performance of the covenant or oath". (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, pp. 26-27.) In judicial and litigation activities, little care is paid to the property, life, and honor of citizens; the manner in which cases are concluded is irrelevant; all lawsuits are quickly concluded in any way they want; even if some difficult cases are encountered, there is no need to resort to the law, and judges consult priests, which is a widely popular judicial method in Turkey. Similarly, absolutism is a fundamental feature of Persian political life. The persian king was supreme in power, and he often personally interfered in judicial activities, and the judicial decisions he made could not be changed, even if they were contrary to the law. In Persia, "if one is convicted by the king, then the people are not allowed to speak of him again, nor are they allowed to ask for forgiveness." If the king had made this decision while drunk or insane, his edict would have been to be carried out; otherwise he would have contradicted himself, but the law could not contradict itself. There, this idea is always there." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, pp. 27-28.) Despotism treated its subjects as slaves and therefore often did not allow people to leave the country at will; but the Persian king allowed people to leave the country at will, which was a very good practice for Persian absolutism itself. In India, the monastic system dominated the realm of political life, so the rule of the monarch was often intertwined with the power of religious monks. In land relations, "Indian law gives land to the monarch, undermining the idea of private ownership." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 232.) Because of the influence of social customs, the Indians did not strictly prohibit women in the deep boudoir like the Turkish, Persian, Chinese, Japanese, and other empires, and they were not so strict with women's claustrophobia, nor did they take many precautions to restrain them, and as a result, "the corruption of their customs is unimaginable." (Note: See Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. I, p. 266.) ）

The spirit of Japanese law epitomizes the characteristics of Japanese authoritarianism. The punishment there is extremely cruel and severe, and almost all criminals are sentenced to death, even if they gamble money. This harsh punishment is based on the idea that the emperor is the owner of all property, so almost all crimes are directly against his interests, so punishing the criminals is to avenge the emperor. This cruel punishment is also related to the character of the Japanese. "The character of the Japanese people is amazing. The Japanese people are stubborn, willful, resolute, eccentric, and all dangers and disasters are ignored. At first glance, it seems that this character can save legislators from blame for not thinking their laws are too cruel. But these people have always despised death, and often commit suicide by caesarean section because of the most insignificant fantasy. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 87.) Here Montesquieu advises the Japanese legislators to establish appropriate punishments and rewards, either through moral and religious rules, or by applying laws of honor, or by adopting a silent approach to educating the people and improving punishments. However, he also realized that these methods of improvement were incomprehensible to authoritarianism and could not be adopted. "In Japan, authoritarianism has tried its best to abuse power, so it has become more vicious than authoritarianism itself." "The hearts of the people, everywhere, are shocked and become more brutal; they can only be harnessed with harsher cruelty." "This is the origin of Japanese law. This is the spirit of Japanese law. But these laws are more brutal than they are powerful. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 88.) ）

Compared with the analysis of other Asian countries, Montesquieu's thinking on the ancient Chinese Empire has many special features, even contradictory views. (Note: The French sinologist Yasuda Pu compared the narrative of the Chinese political system in the official print of "On the Spirit of law" with the relevant materials in the archives of "On the Spirit of Law", and found that the views on the characteristics of the Chinese political form in the latter were precisely the views of those missionaries who praised the Chinese political system, and this was also the view that he vigorously refuted in his book "On the Spirit of Law". In his manuscript on the Spirit of the Law, Montesquieu even argued that "China is a mixed form of government, and to a large extent resembles absolutism because of the unlimited power of the emperor." China's restrictions on government and a certain morality based on parents and filial piety also have some republican characteristics, and China is a monarchy because of some strict laws and the worship of firm behavior that dares to take risks. These three very mild events and the natural phenomena of the climate perpetuate it. If the empire's lofty greatness has turned it into an authoritarian government, it may be the best of all governments. Obviously, what Montesquieu affirmed in the manuscript of On the Spirit of the Law later became the object of criticism in the official edition of the Treatise on the Spirit of the Law. In the later Montesquieu view, if the Chinese polity combined deterrence, honor, and morality, then in establishing the principles of the three regimes, it proposed an empty and meaningless distinction. Yasuda analyzed that the reason why the later Montesquieu wanted to deny what he affirmed in the Archives of the Spirit of the Law was related to the incident of the controversy over etiquette in China at that time, and montesquieu was obviously influenced by Fu Shengze in his view of this event. Thus, Montesquieu's image of China is incoherent and contradictory, see Yasuda Park: A History of The Westward Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 493-533. See also [French] Ai Tianpu: The Europe of China, vol. II, translated by Xu Jun and Qian Linsen, Henan People's Publishing House, 1992, p. 85. On the one hand, he realized that China's political and legal life does have its own unique form of expression, and that some of the previous negative opinions about China's political system were wrong, and that "even in the wrong understanding itself, there are often some realities." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, pp. 128, 128, 316.) Due to some special factors or unique circumstances, many miracles have been performed in this country of China. For example, China's climate is unusually suitable for the reproduction of the population, and the most barbaric tyranny cannot stop the process of reproduction, and the Chinese population becomes a factor that inhibits tyranny. In order to prevent the emergence of turmoil and chaos due to the large population and the lack of livelihood, China's monarchs are often warned of this, and then reform the maladministration and punish corruption, so that "in China, corrupt rule is quickly punished." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 128.) For another example, Chinese attaches great importance to the role of ritual rule, and ritual rituals are closely related to China's basic political system. "The composition of this empire is based on the idea of governing the family. If you reduce your parental authority, or even simply remove the etiquette of showing respect for it, it will be tantamount to reducing people's respect for officials who are close to their parents, so that officials cannot love the common people, and officials should have regarded them as children; in this way, the relationship of love that existed between the monarch and his subjects will gradually disappear. Just cut off one of these habits and you shake the country." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 316.) Thus, the rulers concentrated all their strength and formulated countless rituals and rituals, guiding and encouraging people to follow the rules of ethics, making people obey filial piety, and cultivating the concept of obedience and filial respect. The legislators of ancient China were more wise, and they did not consider human beings in terms of the state of peace that human beings might enjoy in the future, but in terms of actions suitable for fulfilling the obligations of social life, so their laws were more in line with reality. (Note: Yasuda said Montesquieu involuntarily appreciated the content of "etiquette," which was actually one of the new and questionable features that shaped Chinese culture, and understood very thoroughly the importance of etiquette in Chinese culture and government.) So Yasuda asked, "Since many respectable laws and many outstanding ceremonies govern this distant empire, how can Montesquieu suddenly regard it as the worst authoritarian state?" See History of The Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 505-507. In order to ensure the establishment of a ceremonial order, the rulers spared no expense in the use of the power of punishment. "Those monarchs who rule the country by punishment without courtesy want to use punishment to accomplish what the power of punishment cannot do, that is, to establish morality." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, pp. 313-314.) Of course, China's use of punishment still pays attention to differentiated treatment. "In China, robbery and murder are delayed, but this is not the case with other robberies. Because of this difference, people who rob in China do not often kill people. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 91.) Another example is that, in general, in democracies there is a need for a system of inspectors, whereas monarchies do not need ombudsmen, and especially in autocracy. In China, however, an ombudsman system has been established. It is obvious that authoritarian governments should not have ombudsmen. But the case of China seems to have undermined this law. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 72.) According to Montesquieu, the unique features of the political and legal life of ancient China embody the Chinese national spirit. In his view, "to the extent that it does not violate the principles of the form of government, it is the duty of the legislator to conform to the spirit of the nation." For when we are free to obey the favor of our natural nature, that is when we handle things best. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 305.) In China, rituals and customs are endless, integrated with national life and national spirit, and therefore cannot be destroyed, and can never be changed. We should not be surprised that Chinese legislators have mixed laws, customs, and etiquette in the same code, "because their customs represent their laws, and their etiquette represents their customs." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 312.) Thus, guided by this national spirit, "the main goal of the Chinese legislators is to enable their people to live in peace." They want everyone to respect each other, everyone to feel a lot of obligations to others at all times, and every citizen to depend on other citizens in one way. Therefore, they have formulated the most extensive 'rules of etiquette'". (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 312.) It is precisely this unique national legal spirit that makes ancient Chinese legal culture unique.

However, on the other hand, Montesquieu, out of some prejudice, always asserted that the political system of ancient China was an autocratic form, and that despotism was the essential feature of the ancient Chinese Empire. (Note: According to Yasuda's analysis, Montesquieu's unfriendly attitude toward China was largely influenced by fu Shengze, a Jesuit who hated China. The change of this priest from a former Chinese enthusiast to the first unfriendly figure to China not only caused Montesquieu to change his attitude, but also completely changed the image of the Chinese Empire during the 18th century. See History of The Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, pp. 464-468. He disagreed with the views of some missionaries praising the political system of ancient China, but he agreed with some European merchants who criticized the officials of the ancient Chinese government, believing that the situation in China could be referred to by the merchants about the predatory behavior of the officials there. Is it because there, the constant exercise of a single individual will, has moved them? (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 127.) In On the Spirit of the Law, Montesquieu discusses the political system of the Chinese Empire in an attempt to make the image of China described by the missionaries inferior. He repeatedly stressed that the nature of China's political system is authoritarian, which is beyond doubt. "China is an authoritarian country, and its principle is terror. In the early dynasties, the territory was not so vast, and the autocracy of the government may have been slightly worse; but today the situation is the opposite." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 129.) Chinese emperors often presented themselves as "sons of heaven," ruled like "heaven," exemplified "heaven," and drew great impetus from it. In order to maintain the authority of the absolute monarch, Chinese law stipulates that anyone who disrespects the emperor will be punished by death; however, since the law does not clearly stipulate what disrespect is, anything can be used as an excuse to deprive anyone of his life, or even exterminate the entire family. In China, "people used to want to make law and authoritarianism go hand in hand, but anything associated with authoritarianism loses their power." Chinese absolutism, under the pressure of endless calamities, was once willing to put chains on itself, but in vain; it armed itself with its own chains and became even more violent." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 129.) Many of Montesquieu's contemporaries disagreed with Montesquieu's negative assessment of the ancient Chinese political system. Some argue that the author's conclusions about Chinese absolutism are based on Roman politics; in fact, the emperor of China is no more authoritarian than the kings of France and Spain (in the sense of authoritarianism as he understands it). See [French] Yasuda Park: A History of the Western Transmission of Chinese Culture to Europe, p. 49 3. See also Zhu Jianjin, Where Is Eastern Society Going: Marx's Theory of Oriental Society, pp. 38-39. Thus, in China, the monarchs knew that if he did not rule well, he would lose his empire and his life. It should be pointed out that Montesquieu's attitude toward China also affected Rousseau. (Note: See Xin Jianfei, China's View of the World, pp. 197-199.) ）

Like Voltaire, Montesquieu paid close attention to examining the relationship between eastern customs and etiquette and eastern law. In his view, the customs and habits of the East are relatively fixed and unchanged, they form the basis of social life in the East, and they are the strength of Eastern absolutism. He pointed out: "Laws are made, and customs are based on people's perceptions. Customs are derived from the 'general spirit' of the people; laws come from 'special institutions'. Overthrowing the 'general spirit' and changing the 'special system' are equally dangerous, even more dangerous. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 309.) In the countries of the East, people always consciously or unconsciously maintained the authority of customs and etiquette, and monarchs or legislators were more careful than any other country in the world not to change customs and etiquette. Because they know that changing the customs, etiquette and customs of these generations will lead to serious consequences. Therefore, "the customs and etiquette of an authoritarian state should never be changed; this is an important criterion." Nothing can cause revolution more quickly than this. For these countries are like no laws. They have only customs and etiquette. If customs and etiquette are overthrown, everything is overturned." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 309.) Not only that, Montesquieu also attaches great importance to the influence of natural environment and conditions on eastern legal culture. An important methodological principle of his analysis of legal phenomena is to try to reveal the relationship between law and all things that exist. Therefore, he emphasized and even to some extent one-sidedly exaggerated the influence of geographical environmental factors on legal phenomena and their role. Montesquieu's general view of the relationship between natural conditions and the legal culture of Eastern society is that the reason for the persistence of religions, customs, customs, and laws in the eastern countries is closely related to the natural conditions in the East; eastern absolutism is intrinsically linked to a vast empire in the territory, and the prerequisite for a great empire is that the individual ruler must have autocratic power. (Note: According to some scholars, Montesquieu's view of the interconnection between absolutism and the vastness of the territory has aroused such strong resonance as The Russian Emperor Yekatrina that she accurately repeated it in her own "Edict to the Commissioner for the New Code". See [Australia] M. Sauwell, "The Prehistory of the Marxist Concept of The Mode of Production in Asia Minor", translated in Hao Zhenhua, ed., On the Mode of Production in Asia Minor, vol. 1, p. 196. He arbitrarily argues that places with hot climates are usually shrouded in authoritarianism. (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 64.) Depending on the climate, the law has different levels of trust in the people. In areas with cold climates, the law is harsh and cruel, and legislators and officials do not fully trust the people; in mild climates, legislators have a lot of trust in the people, setting very few penalties, and the punishments are not harsh, even not severe. So, "the happy climate produces frank customs that bring gentle laws." (Note: Montesquieu: On the Spirit of the Law, vol. 1, p. 241.) This analysis seems a bit far-fetched.