So I was browsing the French Revolution Digital Archive, it's a collaboration between Standford University and the French national library to digitalizes documents related to the French revolution:
"The Archives parlementaires provide an unparalleled view into the workings of the Revolution through the thoughts and actions of its participants. The work is a day-to-day record of debates and discussions held by the three parliamentary bodies that legislated for France between 1789 and 1794. "
While reading a speech (from summer 1789) about the division of powers, democracy, representation, etc I was a bit surprised by something they say:
La représentation du peuple était inconnue aux anciens ; et quand on réfléchit à tous ses avantages, on est tenté de pardonner au gouvernement féodal, dont elle tire son origine, tous les maux qu'il a faits à l'Europe. La représentation du peuple, malgré tous les sophisines des admirateurs outrés des Grecs et des Romains, est véritablement la plus belle, la plus heureuse de toutes les institutions politiques.
Which roughly translates to:
Representation was unknown to ancient people; and if we think about all its advantage, we are tempted to forgive the feudal government, from which it originates, all the evils it did to Europe. The representation of people, despite all the sophisms of the furious admirers of the Greeks and Romans, is truly the most beautiful, the most joyful of all political institution.
Where does that idea that representation originates from the feudal government comes from ? It's the first time I head about it, I though people at the time were not very found of things feudal.
I think you're mistranslating that passage. It's an awkward construction (very common in 18th century French writing, especially political writing), but I don't think the indefinite article "dont" there is referring to representation. The author is stating that all the ills of Europe derive from the feudal system, a.k.a the Old Regime.
It makes more sense when you remember that this would have been read aloud to the Convention; the strange comma there is a planned pause for emphasis. Additionally, the context seems to be about the limits of executive power vis-a-vis legislative power, which seems to support him decrying feudalism rather than supporting it.