Oriental Despotism

Author(s): Franco Venturi

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1963), pp. 133-142
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2707864 .
Accessed: 15/01/2013 08:57
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of the History of Ideas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ORIENTAL DESPOTISM
BY

FRANCO VENTURI

The historyof the termsdespot and despotismup until the beginning

of the XVIIIth centuryhas been the subject of a recent study by R.
Koebner.1The conclusionsof his ample and painstakingresearchare both
fascinatingand important.From the very beginning,Plato and Aristotle,
these termsare associated, on the one hand, with the relationshipbetween
master and slave and, on the other,with the formsof Oriental political
organization.The medieval translatorsof Aristotleattemptedto communicate the original sense of the terms by using such words as despoticum,
monarchia despotica, and despotizare.At the beginningof the XVth century, a Dominican preacher,one Frate Giordano, spoke of "Herod, who
ruled in mannerdespotical,"and Nicolas Oresme,echoingLucan (Pharsalia,
VII, 442-5) in his commentaryon Aristotle,spoke of the peoples of the East
who are accustomedto slavery and in consequencesubmit to a "princey
despotique.""Et per aventurenontpas memoireque leur pays feustoneques
en liberte." The humanists,however,were unable to accept terms so far
removed fromthe purity of classical Latin as despotes, despoticus,and
despotizare.Leonardo Bruni, for example, used dominatorand dominatio
in theirplace, and these termsbecame widely accepted.Frenchwriters,like
Loys le Roy, and later Bodin, attemptedto translate the classical concept in terms of medieval experience,which was that of seignorial rule
based on the relationshipbetweenthe seigneurand the serf.And so Bodin
spoke of monarchieseigneuriale:"Il y a encoresen I'Asie et en l'Ethiopie,
et mesmesen Europe les Princes de Tartarie et de Moschovie,desquels les
subjects s'apellent Chopes, c'est 'a dire Eselaves, ainsi que nous lisons en
l'histoirede Moschovie et pour ceste cause le Roy des Turcs est appelle le
grandSeigneur,non pas tant pour l'estenduede pais, car le Roy Catholique
en a dix fois autant, que pour estre aucunementseigneurdes personneset
des biens" (Six livres de la Re'publique [Lyon, 1579], 189-191).
It remained for Hobbes to go back to the original terms and speak
once more of "bodies politic patrimonialand despotical," of a "kingdom
despotical,"usingthe conceptas part of the foundationforhis doctrine.As
R. Koebner says: "To him [Hobbes] despotic monarchyis neither'barbarian' nor 'oriental'; it originatesin quite a normal,'natural' way. . . ...
Despotic, forHobbes, defineda governmentestablishedby conquest.From
Hobbes and the discussiontouched offby his work,the term returnedto
France, wherewe have it, forexample,fromthe pen of Sorbiereand of La
Bruyere,and wherein the second half of the XVIIth centuryit was to become chargedwith the incipientpolemics against the absolutismof Louis
XIV. The famouspamphletLes soupirs de la France esclave (1689-1690)
sets out, in fact,to describe "les tristeseffetsde la puissance arbitraireet
* Translatedby LotteF. Jacobyand Ian M. TaylorfromRivistaStoricaItaliana (1960), LXXII, fasc.1, 117-126.
1 "Despot and Despotism:Vicissitudes
of a PoliticalTerm."Journalof the
Warburgand CourtauldInstitutes,
XIV (1951), 275ff.Cf. Sven Stelling-Michaud,
"Le mythedu despotisme
Schweizer
Geschichte
orienital,"
Beitrdgezur Allgemeinen
(1960-1),328f.
133

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

134

FRANCO VENTURI

of Frenchabsolutism
despotiquede la courde France."The comparison
du Turc" and withthe "puissancedu GrandSeigneur"
withthe "tyrannie
and is oftento be foundas a motifin polemics.Here
becomescommonplace
which
thedespoticregime
characterizing
againwe findtwoessentialelements
laid holdof France: "que les sujetsdu royaumesontdans
had apparently
qu'ils n'ontriena eux."It is then,and onlythen,at thevery
la servitude,
comesintobeingas
end of the XVIIth centurythatthe termdespotisme
if to sum up the hostilityof all thoseopposedto the policyof the Roi
Soleil.ChaptersLXIV and LXV of theReponseaux questionsd'unprovincial by PierreBayle (1704) are entitled"Du Despotisme,"and pass in
raisedby Hobbes,Sorbiere,
and theotherXVIIthreviewall theproblems
writersin general.Of thetwo centralthemeswhichwe have seen
century
of the conceptof despotism-theabsence
emergefromtheverybeginning
ofproperty
whichreducesthesubjects
ofpoliticallibertyand a distribution
assume
whichprevailshere.We maytherefore
to serfdom-itis theformer
that tyrannyratherthanservitudewas what countedforthe polemicists
of the end of the XVIIth century.Indeed,Bayle concludeshis chapters
qu'il n'y a riende plus
"Aprestout,soyezassure,Monsieur,
by remarking:
on
douxque la liberte.On n'en peutpas direcomme l'a dit de la guerre,
pas. Dulce
qu'elle n'a des agremensque pour ceux qui ne la connoissent
Elle a principalePlus on la gofute,
plusla veut-ongofuter.
belluminexpertis.
2
mentdes charmespour ceux qui ont eprouvele joug de la servitude."
as opposedto that of liberty,had finallycome
The conceptof despotism,
politicalratherthansocial."Ampliintobeing;its contentwas essentially
fiedby thisnewwordthe conceptof despoticruleenteredits continuous
of
politicalcareerin the last yearsof Louis XIV's reign.The deficiencies
the regimemanifested
by the War of the SpanishSuccessionhad caused
decadeto becomea secretopposition
oftheforegoing
group
themalcontents
ofthisgroupwhichpreparedfortheaccessionofa newking.To members
St. Simon,Boulainvillier-'despotisme'
was thenameof a system
Fe'nelon,
whichoughtto be mended.... " 3
It is enoughto lookforward
fifty
years,to 1748,theyearin whichthe
Espritdes lois firstappeared,and to openit at thepassagewhichdeals so
to realizewhat a longway we
withthe conceptof despotism,
insistently
to despoticfear."Il faut
have come.Libertyis stilltheessentialantithesis
de la craintedansun gouvernement
despotique.... On ne peutparlersans
1 Montesquieu,however,in his
monstrueux."
fremirde ce gouvernement
thepoliticalwisdomofpastages,seemsalso to have
greatworksynthesizing
the secondof the elements,
whichfromearliest
takeninto consideration
for
or in thosewhichsubstituted
timeswas implicitin thetermdespotism,
whichare despotic;societymay be so too.
it. It is not onlygovernments
It is not only disregardforor negationof the Law of the Land which
characterizes
thistypeof rule,but it is also the violationof the laws of
2Pierre Bayle,Oeuvresdiverses(La Haye, 1737),TomeIII, 626-627.
3 Koebner,"Despotand Despotism,"
loc. cit.,301.

4Book III, Chap. IX. Montesquieu,

Oeuvrescompletes,
publieessous la directionde M. AndreMasson(Paris,1950),I, 35-36.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ORIENTAL

DESPOTISM

135

of men into instrumentsof the will of the

society and the transformation
despot. "Dans les pays despotiques,oful'on est deja sous l'esclavage politique, l'esclavage civil est plus tolerablequ'ailleurs. Chacun y doit etre assez
contentd'y avoir sa subsistenceet la vie. Ainsi,la conditionde 1'esclaven'y
est guereplus a chargeque la conditiondu sujet." 5
Montesquieuhad elaboratedhis conceptof despotismout of all previous
discussionson freedom,over-lordship,sovereignty,civil bondage, serfdom,
orientalpractices.If these elementsare consideredtogether-and we may
refernow to the analysis of them by Robert Shackleton,today's greatest
experton Montesquieu5a-the Esprit des lois may once again take its place
of XVIIIth-century political ideas. Indeed, after its
as the turning-point
appearance, the elementssynthesizedthere were to break up and become
dispersedonce more.
It was Voltaire who anatomized dryly the purely gratuitousand imaginaryattributeswhichhad come to be associated withthe idea of despotic
absolutism."Nous attachons a ce titre l'idee d'un fou feroce,qui n'ecoute
que son caprice; d'un barbare qui fait rangerdevant lui ses courtisansprostern's, et qui, pour se divertir,ordonne'a ses satellitesd'etranglera droite
et d'empaler'a gauche." 6 Absolutism,"enlighteneddespotism,"as we call it
nowadays,was muchtoo seriousand importanta matterto be confusedwith
of Oriental potentates.And, in fact,the true nature of Chinese,
the whimns
Turkish, and Indian rulers was very differentfromthat which Montesquieu and his followershad claimed. What really interestedVoltaire was
the relationshipbetweenabsolutismand liberty,and he was eager to disencumberthe discussionof all superfluousmatter.
In so doing Voltaire opened a road whichmost of the physiocratswere
to tread. For them despotismmeant a particularlyconsciousand energetic
formof absolutismwhichwas in conflictwiththe constitutionalassemblies,
the magistrates,the corporations,or the citieswhichhad usurpedthe powers
of the monarch.In this conflictdespotismwas merelyattemptingto reestablish and enforcethe natural legal code, the laws of naturewhichrightfully
should regulateeconomicand social existence.This was the " legal despotism" talked about so much duringthe period which was decisive for the
political activity of the physiocrats; in other words, duringthe last ten
years of the reignof Louis XV, fromthe end of the Seven Years War until
1774. Thanks to Quesnay and to several of his followersthis "legal despotism" assumed the exotic coloringpeculiar to the Chinese empire.The absolutismof the Far East was now extolledas the type of legal despotism,in
directcontradictionto the traditionalconceptof Orientaltyranny.We have
here,in fact,the completereversalof a conceptwhichhad slowly matured
fromthe time of Aristotleto that of Montesquieu. While this traditional
concept had fundamentallybeen a mixtureand a confusionof political
intent with social structure,the physiocratsused it to mean, quite prefromeconomiclaws;
cisely,the idea of a total disengagementof government
5 Book XV, Chap. I, ibid.,325.
Sa Robert Shackleton,Montesquieu. A Critical Biography (Oxford,1961), 269.
6 Commentairesur V'Esprit des lois. Oeuvres completes, ed. Moland (Paris,

1890),XXX, 409.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

136

FRANCO VENTURI

and theabsoluterespecton thepartof therulerforthe objectivevalidity

of such laws as naturallygovernsociety.The use of the termby the
economistes
was so paradoxicalthatit gave riseto all mannerof polemics
and violentdiscussions,
whilemenlikeTurgot,verycloseto thephysiocrats
it. The result
in theirphilosophy,
refusedto acceptit and evencondemned
in politics-alsobecauseof the political
was thatit neverbecamecurrent
defeatsuffered
by the physiocrats-butremainedthe symbolof a lost
cause and a vain attempt.Gorani,in his bookI1 verodispotismo(1770),
thenewworkings
ofabsolute
tried,forhispart,to evolvea theoryconcerning
in ceptraland easternEuropeanstates,where,in fact,thistype
monarchy
ofinstitution
thanin France.But fromthepoint
was of greaterimportance
of viewof terminology
at least,thisattemptmustalso countas a failure.
"Enlightened
despotism"
is an expression
derivedfromthe vocabularyof
the historianand notfromthatof the menof politicsand philosophes
of
the secondhalfof the XVIIIth century.
Nor,in and aboutthe year 1770,
wereotherparadoxeswantingto be graftedontothatfirstpropounded
by
the physiocrats.
The apologiesfordespotism,
pennedby Linguet,werea
ofdiscussion
curioussymptom
and crisisbutwerenot,forthisreason,any
the less destinedto witherquicklyand to disappearwithoutleavingany
lastingtrace.
The maindirection
of the development
of the termdespotism
was the
one whichcame fromMontesquieu.
It is explicitly
to Montesquieuif but
to contradict
him,thatNicolas-Antoine
Boulangerreferred
in his Recherchessur les originesdu despotisme
oriental(1761), a workin which,with
greatenergyofthought,
he examinedthehistorical
and religiousoriginsof
theinitialconfusion
ofsubjectwithserf.
Montesquieu's
ideas concerning
despotism
weretakenup again shortly
afterby anotherwriter,thistimeto examine,not the earlyorigins,but
the presentrealityand to put it to the testby comparing
it withactual
in the East. And so it was Anquetil-Duperron,
conditions
an explorerand
travellerof remarkablecharacter,
who initiatedthe concluding
phase of
discussionconcerning
XVIIIth-century
thetermdespotism.
Fromthevery
beginning,
as we have seen,thistermhad been associatedwiththe East.
But was it reallytruethat,east of Europe,monarchies
existedwhichwere
foundeduponpoliticalabuse and upon a total lack of any guaranteefor
the property
of the subject?Was thereany basis,in fact,forthisnotion
of Orientaldespotism
whichhad becomeso widespreadand deeplyrooted
withthe centuries?
Abraham-Hyacinte
Anquetil-Duperron
had the advantageof having
beenin Asia formanyyearsand was one of thepioneersin the discovery
of the ancientcivilizationsof Iran and India. An enormousthirstfor
knowledgehad led him to leave Paris and live in India from1755 to 1761.7

His firsttask on returning

to Europewas to publishthe fruitof his disprefacedby an accountof his travelsin India.
covery,the Zend-Avesta,
But immediately
afterwards
he seemsto have been troubledby another
consideration.
His countrymen,
and generallyspeakingall the menof the
7See, A. Jaulme,"Anquetil-Duperron
de biographie
(A.-H.)," in Dictionnaire
frangaise
(Paris,1936),vol. II, col. 1374ff.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ORIENTAL

DESPOTISM

137

incorrect
notionsconcerning
boththe religiousideology
West,entertained
and the earlyhistoryof the Asiaticpeoples.They werealso mistakenin
theirviewson thesocialand politicalregimesofIndia,Turkey,Persia,and
filleda fatnotebookwithpoleAsia in general.Andso Anquetil-Duperron
and quotationswhichhe then called: Le desmics,notes,observations
dansles troisetatsou il passepouretrele plusabsolu,la
potismeconsidere'
Turquie,la Perseet l'Indoustan.Ouvragedanslequelon prouve:1) Que la
le gouvernement
dontjusqu'iSion a represente
manie're
despotiquene peut
qu'en donnerune idee absolument
fausse,2) Que dans les troisetats qui
le prince
viennent
d'etrenommesil y a un codede loixecritesqui obbligent
aussi que les sujets,3) Que dansces troisetatsles particuliers
ontdes proprietes,ou biensmeubleset immeubles
dontils jouissentlibrement.
He was evidently
convincedof thegreatimportance
of his claims,and
fromthe outsetseemsto have beenpersuadedthathis observations
could
be of particularimportance
forthe colonialpolicynot onlyof Francebut
oftheotherEuropeancountries
too.The term,Orientaldespotism,
he maintained,was notmerelya symbolto be used by Westerners,
versedin the
literatureof travelsin the Orient,in theirattemptsto oppose,reform,
or even justifythe absolutemonarchsof theirown countries.Chardin,
Tavernier,and otherswho had suppliedMontesquieuwithhis basic incouldnothavebeensimplyinstruments
formation,
in theargumentation
of
theRoi Soleil and his successorson freedom
in Europeor on theneedfor
monarchsto use theirpowerin orderto establisheven betterand more
naturaleconomiclaws. Colonialexpeditions,
rivalries,and wars made it
important
to knowwhetherOrientaldespotism,
this two-facedmonster
madeup ofpoliticaloppression
and socialserfdom,
reallyexisted.AnquetilDuperronknewthesecountriesat firsthand and felthimselfto be in a
positionto provideadequateanswersto thesenew and diversequestions.
He senthis manuscript
to the famousComtede Vergennes,
Louis XVI's
that he mightmediatethereupon.8
foreignMinister,
was theprincipal,
we mightsay and theonly,objectofhis
Montesquieu
polemic.Anquetilwentback to the sourcesuponwhichthe authorof the
Espritdes loishad drawn."Mon etonnement
a eteextreme
'a la vue du portraitque les voyageurs
fontdes peuplesde l'Asie,portrait
tantotde fantaisie, tantotd'interet
ou de prevention.
. . . Sur le rapportde ces voyageurs
. . . on a fait une espece particuli'ere
de gouvernement
existantsous le
nomde despotique:pointde loix fixes,pointde proprietes
dans ce gouvernement."
Montesquieu
had editedtheseimpressions
and accountsto suit
his own purposes.He was the very type and model of all thosepublicistswho "sur le rapportmal comprisde ces voyageurs"had formulated
"un systieme
de despotismequi n'existereellement
nulle part." In Asia
therewereslaves,it was true,but not everybody
was one. The laws were
violatedin Asia, but so theywerein otherplaces; and thiswas no reason
forsupposing
thattheydid notexist.The systemof taxationwas different
8 The copyof themanuscript,
preserved
in the Bibliotheque
Nationaleof Paris

(Nouvellesacquisitions
453), carriesa note in the hand of Anquetilfranqaises
Duperron:"Tel' qu'il a ete lu en 1776par M. le Comtede Vergennes,
ministre
des
affaires
etrangeires."

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

138

FRANCO VENTURI

in the East (and not necessarilyworse: "En Perse, ci l'on en croitChardin,

il n'y a ni taxes sur les personnes,ni taille"). This did not mean that there
did not exist a fundamentaldistinctionbetweenthe propertyof the subject
and that of the sovereign.While with regardto natural law, in the case of
prisonersof war, for example, only shortlybefore,as Anquetil-Duperron
pointed out, duringthe troublesin India "les Marates en 1775, donnoient
aux Europeens des legonsbien cruellesde droit des gens." And, finally,the
capacity forconductinga foreignpolicy worthyof the name was certainly
not lacking in the annals of Asian history,no matterwhat Montesquieu
mighthave writtento the contrary.Economicallyspeaking,agricultureand
trade flourishedin India, and contractswere as safe in Asia as anywhere
else.
The truthof the matter,as Anquetil-Duperronpointedout in the introductory part of his manuscript,was that the concept of despotismhad
of justificationforthe oppressimplybeen made to serve as the instrument
sion practiced by the Europeans in Asia. He dedicated his book: "Aux
peuples de l'Indoustan," and concluded: "Falloit-il que le bruit de vos
richesses penetrat dans un climat oiu les besoins factices n'ont point de
bornes! Bientot de nouveaux etrangersabordent'a vos cotes. Hotes incommodes, tout ce qu'ils touchentleur appartient.. . . La voix de l'equite ne
peut se faireentendre.Au moins,malheureuxIndiens,peut etre apprendrez
vous qu'en deux centsans un Europeenqui vous a vus, qui 'a vecu avec vous,
a ose reclameren votre faveur,et presenterau Tribunal de l'Univers vos
droitsblesses, ceux de l'Humanite fletrispar un vil interet."9
Quite clearlythe indignationof Anquetil-Duperronwas not intendedto
remain shut in a drawer or to be read by the Comte du Vergennesalone.
In 1778 Marc-Michel Rey of Amsterdam,publisherof the Philosophes,published a quarto edition of the work, enlarged,correctedand revised. The
title was no longerconcernedwith despotismin particular,but modifiedto
Legislation orientale,as the authorthoughtthat so it might"presenteravec
plus de digniteet d'interetl'objet qu'il s'etoit propose." And in this edition
he extendedhis wrathbeyondMontesquieu,to otherFrenchwriterswho had
dealt with despotismduringthat period.
In the workof Nicolas-AntoineBoulangerwhose Recherchessur l'origine
du despotismeoriental10had been publishedposthumouslyin 1761,he found
had even been directed.
a conceptof the verytype against whichhis efforts
Despotism forBoulangerwas a classification,a momentin human history,
and not an actual social system."Si l'on y prendbien garde,son ouvrageest
plus theologiqueque politique,"as Anquetilpointsout, and goes on to say:
qu'il insiste
sortesde gouvernemens,
"Quoiqu' il fassementiondes differentes
sur le despotisme,on voit que l'originedes religionsqui dominentsur la
surface du globe est proprementl'objet qu'il se propose d'eclaircir."11 Up
to a point this was true, for Boulanger did, in fact, tend to go after the
9Le'gislationorientale(Amsterdam,1778), pp. II ff.
10F. Venturi,"Postille inedite di Voltaire ad alcune opere di Nicolas-Antoine
Boulanger,e del barone d'Holbach," in Studi francesi(1958), No. II, pp. 231ff.
11 Legislation orientale,8-9.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ORIENTAL

139

DESPOTISM

historicaland religiousbases of despotismand so providea betterauthenticated justificationfor it, than Montesquieu had done.
Not only Boulanger but other of his contemporarieshad attemptedto
find-not withoutsuccess nor without a considerabledegree of insightsome peculiarlysignificantrevelationof the religiousspiritin general,and
of primitivereligions in particular in the forms of oriental despotism.
Amongstthese was Guerin du Rocher. But Anquetil-Duperronwas not in
a mood to comprehendthis fertileamalgamationof the historyof religion
with that of political systems: his task was to compare all this theorizing
withthe facts,and particularlywiththe factsof political and social history.
In consequence,much of his book was concernedwith showingthat, althoughtherewas certainlyno lack of tyrannicalspiritin the East, one could
not with justice designatethese governmentsas despotic in the true sense
of the word; that is, withoutlaws and withoutpropertyrights.In this he
drew his own experienceand that of others,such as Niebuhr,Dow, Rhoe,
Ricaut, de Chinon,and a host of travellersand missionariesto the East.
It is typical that it was this second aspect of Anquetil-Duperron's
work,the structureof society,whichreceivedthe mostattention.In disproof
of Boulanvilliers,who had maintained that "la barbare loi de l'Orient
aneantit la proprietedes biens,"12 of the many writerswho had asserted
that propertyin Turkey was nothingbut "des proprietesprecaires,"13 of
the travellerswho had relatedthat in India "toutes les terresdans l'Empire
du Mogol appartiennentau prince,"14 or of those who, as Bernier,still insisted that "la Turquie, la Perse et l'Indoustan ont ote le mien et le tien a
I'egard des fonds de terre,"15 Anquetil-Duperronquoted laws, provisions,
and contracts,and described customsand habits in order to demonstrate
the actual existenceof propertyrights.He went furtherin fact, pointing
out that just as the idea of despotismhad served to justifythe violent interventionof Europeans in the East, so the convictionthat no private propertyexistedtherehad proved of considerableuse in supportingthe claims
of thosewho favoredthe confiscationof all native territory.
He foundwhat
he consideredan excellent example of just such a pretextin the writingsof
the Englishman,Alexander Dow."' "Ce procede seroit juste dans le 18'
en propreau
siecle? Toutes les terresd'un pays conquis appartiennent-elles
conquerant?. . . C'est ainsi que les droitsles plus sacres disparoissentaux
jeux d'un vil interet.Ne nous faisons pas d'illusion,Frangois,Anglois! je
plaide igi la cause de l'homme.. . . " The conquerors'line of reasoningwas
de ces contrees.Le
by now quite clear: "Le despotismest le gouvernement
Souverain se dit proprietairede tous les biens de ces sujets. Devenons ce
souverain,et nous voila maltres de toutes les terresde l'Indoustan. Ainsi
raisonnela passion avide. Mais elle se cache sous des dehorsqu'il lui faut
arracher."17
The energy and ardor with which Anquetil-Duperronattempted to
12Histoirede l'anciengouvernement
de la France(Le Haye,1727),I, 67.
13 Legislation
116ff.
orientale,

14 Ibid., 131.

15 Ibid., 140.

16 "Dissertation
Concerning
theOriginand Natureof Despotismin Hindostan,"

212ff.
quotedin fullin Legislationorientale,

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

140

FRANCO VENTURI

redefinethe true nature of despotismexplain why later on he was oftento

reopen the discussion and promulgate his viewpoint. In his Recherches
historiqueet geographiquesur l'Inde 18 he extendedhis attacks even to
such authors-and in particularJohnDalrymple-as had maintainedthat
in many parts of India the "terressont la proprietede la Communaute"19
and that in no case was there "la proprieteindividuelle des terres,la
culturede celles qui appartiennenta chaque village se faisant par la communaute du village et le produitetant (ensuite) partage en certainesportions."20 For Anquetil-Duperronsuch statementswere simple "assertions
sans preuves.""Cette proprietede communauten'existepas dans l'Inde." 21
A greatmany years later,afterthe Revolution,he was to come back to
the problem once again. In 1802, the by now seventy-year-oldAnquetilDuperron had accepted the invitationto edit a French translationof the
Viaggio alle Indie Orientaleumiliato alla Santita di N. S. Papa Pio Sesto
da Fra Paolino da San Bartolomeo carmelitanoscalzo, already published
in Rome in 1796. The French edition had hardly gone to press when, in
1805,he died. But in the Appendixto the Third Volume,frompage 509 on,
one might read once more his Observations tendantes:1) a confirmerce
qu'il a ete dit dans la Legislation Orientaleet dans les Rechercheshistoriques et geographiquessur l'Inde pour prouver l'existance de la propriete
individuelle,fonciereet mobilieredans ce pays, 2) pour etablir le meme
point pour l'Egypte,regie par les lois de l'Empire Ottoman.
Anquetil-Duperronhere answersthe criticismswhichFather Paolino da
S. Bartolomeohad directedagainst him in several of his works.According
to the missionary,the French orientalist"claims that private propertyis
to be encounteredamong the heathen Indians. We, however,would say
that M. Anquetil du Perrontoo oftenallows himselfto be carriedaway by
his spiteagainsttheEnglish,and thathe sometimesdeniesthe truthof things
too certain to admit of denial." 22 In his India Christiana23 too, he had
pointed out that "contra communemsensumet quotidianam exsperientiam
Indis hominibus,etiam privatis, jus absolutum et proprietatemagrorum
mendaciteradscrivereconatur."Anquetilanswershimwitha longdisquisition
concerningthe concept of propertyand the application thereofin Eastern
countries.It was not strictlytruethat in India, Persia, Tartary,Turkey,or
Egypt,the people were"vendusphysiquementet pour toujours" to theirsovreigns,"suppositionimpossibleen soi, et contreditepar l'histoirede toutesles
nations."24"J'ai toujours assez bien presumede l'hommepour croire que
nulle part il ne se depouilloitjamais absolumentde son droit de propriete
reelle: et j e puis dire que la lecturede l'histoireet des voyages faitsdans les
quatres parties du monde n'a fait que confirmera mes yeux une verite
que je crois essentielleau repos du genrehumain."25
17 Ibid.,177-178.
18 Vol. II, pt. 1 (Berlin,1786),223ff. 19 Recherches,
225.
20 Ibid.,227-228.JohnDalrymple,
5thEarl ofStair,was a studentofthehistory

of propertyrights,as may be seen fromhis Essay towarda GeneralHistoryof

Feudal Propertyin GreatBritain(London,1757) and otherworks.
21 Recherches,
228.
22 Viaggioalle Indie Orientale,
246.
23 (Rome,1794), 231.
24 Voyageaux Indes Orientales
25 Ibid.,xl.
(Paris,1808),III, xxiv.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ORIENTAL

DESPOTISM

141

to Anquetil-Duperronwas the discussion

But what was most interesting
which arose with the English,whose colonial policy made it indispensable
to understandthe true nature of Oriental despotism.A few years after
having published the Legislation oriental he had received a letter from
Charles William Boughton Rous, who had also sent him a copy of his
DissertationConcerningthe Landed Propertyof Bengal, publishedin London in 1791. It was a problemwhichcould not fail to interest"a personwho
has already discussed the general question of propertyunder the Asiatic
withthe greatestability: so that,if you had been possessed of
governments
sufficient
materials,I am confidentyou would have renderedany further
demonstrationsuperfluous. ".26 He too was convinced that England
should give up her "tyrannicnotion of exclusivepropertyin the lands of
Bengal." He had said it clearlyin his book, renderingto Anquetil-Duperron
the homagewhichwas due to him from"everyfriendof justice and humanity for undertakingto vindicate the great empiresof Turkey,Persia, and
Indostan fromthe characterof barbarismthat has been ascribed to them,
and reprobatingas they deservethe despoticprojects of those speculators,
who would deny to any part of mankind the blessing of permanentproperty."27
Afterall, concludedRous, was not this dominionof the prince over the
propertyof his subjects, held to be characteristicof Oriental despotism,
very similar perhaps to that right of demesne,that feudal overlordship
which the law allowed the medieval rulers of old? The comparisonmight
when one noted how propertyrightsin general had
even be taken further,
firstappeared in Germany,the very strongholdof imperial practice. "In
drawinga parallel out of Germanyforthe execrabledoctrinesof despotism,
I discoverwith great satisfactiona parallel in the same empireforthe rise
28 Rous then went on to quote
of hereditarypossessions and honours."1
Montesquieu, Robertson,and Victor Riqueti de Mirabeau in support of
his views on the evolutionof propertyrights.He was convincedthat such
evolutionheld both forthe East and the West. And so the conceptsof despotism,afterhaving served as a weapon (and a two-edgedone at that, as
we have seen in the case of the colonial powers) in the hands of thosewho
opposed absolutism,or attemptedto reduce it to a theory,now tended to
become absorbed, at least partially,into the ever-increasingflowof antifeudal polemics-particularlyas regardsits social content.
Nor did Rous's work pass without commentin England itself. James
Grant discussed the legal aspects of the question in his An Inquiry Into
the Nature of ZemindaryTenures (London, 1791) and it persistedin all
debates on Indian policy of the time.29But what matteredto Rous was, to
of
quote fromanotherletterof his to Anquetil-Duperron,the reaffirmation
26 Letter,
Nationale,Paris,NouvellesacquisidatedApril10, 1791.Bibliotheque

8872,f. 45-46.
tionsfrancaises
27 Dissertation
the LandedProperty,108.
Concerning
28Ibid., 110.

29For similarproblemsas they affectedthe earlyXIXth centurysee Eric

and India (Oxford,1959), 85ff.
Stokes,The EnglishUtilitarians

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

142

FRANCO VENTURI

in theAsiaticnationsas a radicalprinciple,
ofland-property
"theexistence
whichhad beendeniedby Mr. Grant."
80
Andso theproblem
passedintotheXIXth century,
whereit was to continueto enjoyno littleimportance.
Herewouldbe anotherfascinating
subFromthe EnglishRadicals to Marx and Engels,
ject forclose attention.
fromMill to Plekhanov,
thetermOrientaldespotism
was to remainbigwith
politicaland ideologicalimplications.
Certainelements
ofthislaterdevelopmentappearin thepagesofthelatestwriterto have tackledtheproblem:
Karl A. Wittfogel,
OrientalDespotism.A ComparativeStudy of Total
Power (New Haven, 1957). It is to himand to his bibliography
thatwe
wouldreferthereaderat thispoint,evenif,ratherthana pieceofhistorical
it is yet anotherattemptto crystallize
research,
intoa theorythe concept
of Orientaldespotism.
ofTurin.
University
80Letter,datedJuly20, 1791.Bibliotheque
Nationale,Paris,ibid.

This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:57:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions