observable in all the governments of modern Europe, they exhibit certain shades of dif ference, from which they may be divided into two classes; the first comprehending such as were founded upon the ruins of the Roman provinces; the second, such as arose in the countries which had never been subject to the Roman empire. In both of these, what is called the feudal system was introduced; but it was more completely and rapidly established in the former than in the latter. In those modern states which grew up from the ruins of the western empire, the inhabitants of so large a territory as that which composed an ancient Roman province, were naturally attracted to a kind of centre, and formed a political union under one sovereign. But the authority of this monarch, over a people so barbarous, and so little accustomed to subordination, was, in proportion to the extent of his dominions, feeble and precarious: and the less capable he was of restraining animosities and quar-` rels among his subjects, or of protecting them from oppression, it became the more necessary that they should take measures for de

fending themselves. For this purpose, every chief, or proprietor of a landed estate, was induced to maintain an intimate connexion with all his kindred and retainers, and to distribute among them a great part of his lands upon condition of their being ready to fight for him against all his enemies. It was thus that Spain, France, England, and a great part of Italy, soon after they had been conquered by the Gothic nations, became extensive rude kingdoms, in which the free people were all united in separate feudal dependencies, each under its own military leader and protector.

The European countries which had never been subjected to the Roman yoke, such as Denmark, Sweden, and a great part of Germany, were in circumstances a little different. The inhabitants originally no less rude and barbarous than the conquerors of the western empire, were not incorporated with any people more civilized than themselves, nor induced by any prior union subsisting through an extensive territory, to associate in very large communities. Their different tribes, or families, accordingly, fol

lowing the natural course of improvement, advanced very slowly in their political associations; and and were collected in small principalities, before they rose to considerable kingdoms. But in proportion as the boundaries of any particular state were narrow, the prince was more powerful, and his administration more vigorous; in consequence of which, the people, depending more upon him for protection, resorted less to private combinations for mutual defence. The connexion between the head of a tribe and its members, between the proprietor of a landed estate and its retainers, between a superior and his vassals, could not fail to subsist in all those nations, after they had acquired a fixed residence; but this connexion was less extended in proportion to the narrowness of each political community; and the services, or duties, to which it gave occasion, were less multiplied, and reduced into a regular system. Afterwards, however, the feudal institutions and customs were promoted in those countries, from an intercourse with such neighbouring states as, by settling in the Roman pro

vinces, had made greater progress in that sys tem of policy.

Scotland appears to have been in a middle situation between these different countries. A part of it had fallen within the limits of a Roman province, like the other countries in the west of Europe. A part of it, likewise, had received a number of Anglo-Saxon inhabitants, who contributed to propagate those institutions and customs which prevailed in England. The remainder was in the condition of those European countries, where the dominion of the ancient Romans afforded the people no peculiar motive to extensive combination, or, of consequence, to feudal subordination.

In tracing the history of the Scottish government, there are three great periods which fall to be distinguished. The first reaches from the time when Britain was abandoned by the Romans to the reign of Malcolm the Second. This comprehends the primitive aristocracy; and is analogous to the period of the Anglo-Saxon government in the southern part of the island. The second extends from that reign to the time when James the Sixth of Scotland mounted the English

throne. This corresponds to the reigns of the Norman, Plantagenet, and Tudor princes in England, and exhibits the circumstances which, from the nature of the feudal policy, contributed to exalt the power of the monarch. The third contains the interval between the union of the crowns of England and Scotland, to the union of the two kingdoms. In this last period, the Scottish nation had not made such advances in commerce as could produce any great alteration in their political system; but the administration of their government was then rendered subordinate to that of England, a manufacturing and commercial country.

SECTION I.

OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SCOTLAND, FROM THE TIME WHEN BRITAIN WAS ABANDONED BY THE ROMANS, TO THE REIGN OF MALCOLM THE SECOND.

DURING this early period, little is known with certainty; and we must be satisfied with a delineation, from probable conjecture, of the bare outlines and prevailing character of

3