He went from Venice to Rome. In this ancient capital of the world he
studied the works of Raphael, of Titian, and of Michael Angelo.
Accustomed to study nature, he knew her when she was translated, as a
faithful portrait appeals to all who are familiar with the original.

After having traveled over Italy, M. de Montesquieu came to Switzerland
and studied those vast countries which are watered by the Rhine. There
was the less for him to see in Germany that Frederick did not yet reign.
In the United Provinces he beheld an admirable monument of what human
industry animated by a love of liberty can do. In England he stayed
three years. Welcomed by the greatest men, he had nothing to regret save
that he had not made his journey sooner. Newton and Locke were dead. But
he had often the honor of paying his respects to their patroness, the
celebrated Queen of England, who cultivated philosophy upon a throne,
and who properly esteemed and valued M. de Montesquieu. Nor was he less
well received by the nation. At London he formed intimate friendships
with the great thinkers. With them he studied the nature of the
government, attaining profound knowledge of it.

As he had set out neither as an enthusiast nor a cynic, he brought back
neither a disdain for foreigners nor a contempt for his own country. It
was the result of his observations that Germany was made to travel in,
Italy to sojourn in, England to think in, and France to live in.

After returning to his own country, M. de Montesquieu retired for two
years to his estate of La Brede, enjoying that solitude which a life in
the tumult and hurry of the world but makes the more agreeable. He lived
with himself, after having so long lived with others; and finished his
work 'On the Cause of the Grandeur and Decline of the Romans,' which
appeared in 1734.

Empires, like men, must increase, decay, and be extinguished. But this
necessary revolution may have hidden causes which the veil of time
conceals from us.

Nothing in this respect more resembles modern history than ancient
history. That of the Romans must, however, be excepted. It presents us
with a rational policy, a connected system of aggrandizement, which will
not permit us to attribute the great fortune of this people to obscure
and inferior sources. The causes of the Roman grandeur may then be found
in history, and it is the business of the philosopher to discover them.
Besides, there are no systems in this study, as in