Thelastfollyofthiskindisstillmorerecent。IntheGermannewspapers，ofAugust1838，appearedanordonnance，signedbytheKingofBavaria，forbiddingcivilians，onanypretencewhatever，towearmoustachios，andcommandingthepoliceandotherauthoritiestoarrest，andcausetobeshaved，theoffendingparties。“Strangetosay，“adds“LeDroit，“thejournalfromwhichthisaccountistaken，“moustachiosdisappearedimmediately，likeleavesfromthetreesinautumn；everybodymadehastetoobeytheroyalorder，andnotonepersonwasarrested。
　　TheKingofBavaria，arhymesterofsomecelebrity，hastakenagoodmanypoeticallicencesinhistime。Hislicenceinthismatterappearsneitherpoeticalnorreasonable。Itistobehopedthathewillnottakeitintohisroyalheadtomakehissubjectsshavetheirs；nothingbutthatiswantingtocompletetheirdegradation。
　　Therewasanancientsagephilosopher，Whosworetheworld，ashecouldprove，Wasmadoffighting。***
　　Hudibras，Mostwriters，inaccountingfortheoriginofduelling，deriveitfromthewarlikehabitsofthosebarbarousnationswhooverranEuropeintheearlycenturiesoftheChristianera，andwhoknewnomodesoeffectualforsettlingtheirdifferencesasthepointofthesword。Infact，duelling，takeninitsprimitiveandbroadestsense，meansnothingmorethancombatting，andistheuniversalresortofallwildanimals，includingman，togainordefendtheirpossessions，oravengetheirinsults。Twodogswhoteareachotherforabone，ortwobantamsfightingonadunghillfortheloveofsomebeautifulhen，ortwofoolsonWimbledonCommon，shootingateachothertosatisfythelawsofoffendedhonour，standonthesamefootinginthisrespect，andare，eachandall，mereduellists。Ascivilizationadvanced，thebestinformedmennaturallygrewashamedofsuchamodeofadjustingdisputes，andthepromulgationofsomesortoflawsforobtainingredressforinjurieswastheconsequence。Stillthereweremanycasesinwhichtheallegationsofanaccusercouldnotberebuttedbyanypositiveproofonthepartoftheaccused；andinallthese，whichmusthavebeenexceedinglynumerousintheearlystagesofEuropeansociety，thecombatwasresortedto。Fromitsdecisiontherewasnoappeal。Godwassupposedtonervethearmofthecombatantwhosecausewasjust，andtogranthimthevictoryoverhisopponent。AsMontesquieuwellremarks，[“EspritdesLoix，“liv。xxviii。chap。
　　xvii。]thisbeliefwasnotunnaturalamongapeoplejustemergingfrombarbarism。Theirmannersbeingwhollywarlike，themandeficientincourage，theprimevirtueofhisfellows，wasnotunreasonablysuspectedofothervicesbesidescowardice，whichisgenerallyfoundtobeco-existentwithtreachery。He，therefore，whoshowedhimselfmostvaliantintheencounter，wasabsolvedbypublicopinionfromanycrimewithwhichhemightbecharged。Asanecessaryconsequence，societywouldhavebeenreducedtoitsoriginalelements，ifthemenofthought，asdistinguishedfromthemenofaction，hadnotdevisedsomemeansfortamingtheunrulypassionsoftheirfellows。Withthisview，governmentscommencedbyrestrictingwithinthenarrowestpossiblelimitsthecasesinwhichitwaslawfultoproveordenyguiltbythesinglecombat。BythelawofGondebaldus，KingoftheBurgundians，passedintheyear501，theproofbycombatwasallowedinalllegalproceedings，inlieuofswearing。InthetimeofCharlemagne，theBurgundianpracticehadspreadovertheempireoftheFrancs，andnotonlythesuitorsforjustice，butthewitnesses，andeventhejudges，wereobligedtodefendtheircause，theirevidence，ortheirdecision，atthepointofthesword。LouistheDebonnaire，hissuccessor，endeavouredtoremedythegrowingevil，bypermittingtheduelonlyinappealsoffelony，incivilcases，orissuejoinedinawritofright，andincasesofthecourtofchivalry，orattacksuponaman’sknighthood。Nonewereexemptfromthesetrials，butwomen，thesickandthemaimed，andpersonsunderfifteenorabovesixtyyearsofage。Ecclesiasticswereallowedtoproducechampionsintheirstead。Thispractice，inthecourseoftime，extendedtoalltrialsofcivilandcriminalcases，whichhadtobedecidedbybattle。
　　Theclergy，whosedominionwasanintellectualone，neverapprovedofasystemofjurisprudencewhichtendedsomuchtobringallthingsundertheruleofthestrongestarm。Fromthefirsttheysettheirfacesagainstduelling，andendeavoured，asfarastheprejudicesoftheiragewouldallowthem，tocurbthewarlikespirit，soalienfromtheprinciplesofreligion。IntheCouncilofValentia，andafterwardsintheCouncilofTrent，theyexcommunicatedallpersonsengagedinduelling，andnotonlythem，buteventheassistantsandspectators，declaringthecustomtobehellishanddetestable，andintroducedbytheDevilforthedestructionbothofbodyandsoul。Theyadded，also，thatprinceswhoconnivedatduels，shouldbedeprivedofalltemporalpower，jurisdiction，anddominionovertheplaceswheretheyhadpermittedthemtobefought。Itwillbeseenhereafterthatthisclauseonlyencouragedthepracticewhichitwasintendedtoprevent。
　　ButitwastheblasphemouserroroftheseearlyagestoexpectthattheAlmighty，wheneverhewascalledupon，wouldworkamiracleinfavourofapersonunjustlyaccused。Thepriesthood，incondemningtheduel，didnotcondemntheprincipleonwhichitwasfounded。TheystillencouragedthepopularbeliefofDivineinterferenceinallthedisputesordifferencesthatmightariseamongnationsorindividuals。
　　Itwastheverysameprinciplethatregulatedtheordeals，which，withalltheirinfluence，theysupportedagainsttheduel。Bytheformer，thepowerofdecidingtheguiltorinnocencewasvestedwhollyintheirhands，while，bythelatter，theyenjoyednopowerorprivilegeatall。Itisnottobewonderedat，thatforthisreason，iffornoother，theyshouldhaveendeavouredtosettlealldifferencesbythepeacefulmode。Whilethatprevailed，theywereastheywishedtobe，thefirstpartyinthestate；butwhilethestrongarmofindividualprowesswasallowedtobethejudgeinalldoubtfulcases，theirpowerandinfluencebecamesecondarytothoseofnobility。
　　Thus，itwasnotthemerehatredofbloodshedwhichinducedthemtolaunchthethunderboltsexcommunicationagainstthecombatants；itadesiretoretainthepower，which，todothemjustice，theywere，inthosetimes，thepersonsbestqualifiedtowield。Thegermsofknowledgeandcivilizationlaywithintheboundsoftheirorder；fortheyweretherepresentativesoftheintellectual，asthenobilitywereofthephysicalpowerofman。TocentralizethispowerintheChurch，andmakeitthejudgeofthelastresortinallappeals，bothincivilandcriminalcases，theyinstitutedfivemodesoftrial，themanagementofwhichlaywhollyintheirhands。TheseweretheoathupontheEvangelists；theordealofthecross，andthefireordeal，forpersonsinthehigherranks；thewaterordeal，forthehumblerclasses；and，lastly，theCorsned，orbreadandcheeseordeal，formembersoftheirownbody。
　　TheoathupontheEvangelistswastakeninthefollowingmanner:
　　theaccusedwhowasreceivedtothisproof，saysPaulHay，CountduChastelet，inhisMemoirsofBertrandduGuesclin，sworeuponacopyoftheNewTestament，andontherelicsoftheholymartyrs，orontheirtombs，thathewasinnocentofthecrimeimputedtohim。Hewasalsoobligedtofindtwelvepersons，ofacknowledgedprobity，whoshouldtakeoathatthesametime，thattheybelievedhiminnocent。
　　Thismodeoftrialledtoverygreatabuses，especiallyincasesofdisputedinheritance，wherethehardestswearerwascertainofthevictory。Thisabusewasoneoftheprincipalcauseswhichledtothepreferencegiventothetrialbybattle。Itisnotallsurprisingthatafeudalbaron，orcaptainoftheearlyages，shouldhavepreferredthechancesofafairfightwithhisopponent，toamodebywhichfirmperjurywouldalwaysbesuccessful。
　　Thetrialby，orjudgmentof，thecross，whichCharlemagnebeggedhissonstohaverecourseto，incaseofdisputesarisingbetweenthem，wasperformedthus:——Whenapersonaccusedofanycrimehaddeclaredhisinnocenceuponoath，andappealedtothecrossforitsjudgmentinhisfavour，hewasbroughtintothechurch，beforethealtar。Thepriestspreviouslypreparedtwosticksexactlylikeoneanother，upononeofwhichwascarvedafigureofthecross。Theywerebothwrappedupwithgreatcareandmanyceremonies，inaquantityoffinewool，andlaiduponthealtar，orontherelicsofthesaints。A
　　solemnprayerwasthenoffereduptoGod，thathewouldbepleasedtodiscover，bythejudgmentofhisholycross，whethertheaccusedpersonwereinnocentorguilty。Apriestthenapproachedthealtar，andtookuponeofthesticks，andtheassistantsunswatheditreverently。Ifitwasmarkedwiththecross，theaccusedpersonwasinnocent；ifunmarked，hewasguilty。Itwouldbeunjusttoassert，thatthejudgmentsthusdeliveredwere，inallcases，erroneous；anditwouldbeabsurdtobelievethattheywereleftaltogethertochance。Manytruejudgmentsweredoubtlessgiven，and，inallprobability，mostconscientiously；forwecannotbutbelievethatthepriestsendeavouredbeforehandtoconvincethemselvesbysecretinquiryandastrictexaminationofthecircumstances，whethertheappellantwereinnocentorguilty，andthattheytookupthecrossedoruncrossedstickaccordingly。Although，toallotherobservers，thesticks，asenfoldedinthewool，mightappearexactlysimilar，thosewhoenwrappedthemcould，withoutanydifficulty，distinguishtheonefromtheother。
　　Bythefire-ordealthepowerofdecidingwasjustasunequivocallyleftintheirhands。Itwasgenerallybelievedthatfirewouldnotburntheinnocent，andtheclergy，ofcourse，tookcarethattheinnocent，orsuchasitwastheirpleasureorinteresttodeclareso，shouldbesowarnedbeforeundergoingtheordeal，astopreservethemselveswithoutanydifficultyfromthefire。Onemodeofordealwastoplacered-hotploughsharesonthegroundatcertaindistances，andthen，blindfoldingtheaccusedperson，makehimwalkbarefootedoverthem。Ifhesteppedregularlyinthevacantspaces，avoidingthefire，hewasadjudgedinnocent；ifheburnedhimself，hewasdeclaredguilty。Asnonebuttheclergyinterferedwiththearrangementoftheploughshares，theycouldalwayscalculatebeforehandtheresultoftheordeal。Tofindapersonguilty，theyhadonlytoplacethematirregulardistances，andtheaccusedwassuretotreadupononeofthem。WhenEmma，thewifeofKingEthelred，andmotherofEdwardtheConfessor，wasaccusedofaguiltyfamiliaritywithAlwyn，BishopofWinchester，sheclearedhercharacterinthismanner。Thereputation，notonlyoftheirorder，butofaqueen，beingatstake，averdictofguiltywasnottobeapprehendedfromanyploughshareswhichpriestshadtheheatingof。ThisordealwascalledtheJudiciumDei，andsometimestheVulgarisPurgatio，andmightalsobetriedbyseveralothermethods。Onewastoholdinthehand，unhurt，apieceofred-hotiron，oftheweightofone，two，orthreepounds。Whenwereadnotonlythatmenwithhardhands，butwomenofsofterandmoredelicateskin，coulddothiswithimpunity，wemustbeconvincedthatthehandswerepreviouslyrubbedwithsomepreservative，orthattheapparentlyhotironwasmerelycoldironpaintedred。Anothermodewastoplungethenakedarmintoacaldronofboilingwater。Theprieststhenenvelopeditinseveralfoldsoflinenandflannel，andkeptthepatientconfinedwithinthechurch，andundertheirexclusivecare，forthreedays。If，attheendofthattime，thearmappearedwithoutascar，theinnocenceoftheaccusedpersonwasfirmlyestablished。
　　[Verysimilartothisisthefire-ordealofthemodernHindoos，。whichisthusdescribedinForbes’s“OrientalMemoirs，“vol。i。c。xi——“