,,historic  ,,doubts  ,,relative ,,to   
,,napoleon ,,buonaparte4     ,is not the
 same reason available in theology and  
in politics8444   ,will you follow truth
 but to a certain point8--,,burke',s    
,vindication of ,natural ,society4      
,the first author who stated fairly the 
connexion between the   evidence of     
testimony and the evidence of           
experience1 was ,hume1 in   his ,,essay 
,,on ,,miracles2 a work abounding in    
maxims of great use in   the conduct of 
life4--,edinburgh ,review1 ,sept4 #ahad1
 p4 #cbh4  ,,new ,,edition4  ,,london3  
,,longmans1 ,,green1 ,,and ,,co4        
,,mdccclxv4     ,,london3 ,,savill ,,and
 ,,edwards1 ,,printers1 ,,chandos       
,,street1 ,,covent ,,garden4            
,,preface4   ,several of the readers of 
this little work 7first published in    
#ahai7 have derived much amusement from 
the mistakes of others respecting its   
nature and object4 ,it has been by some 
represented as a serious attempt to     
inculcate universal scepticism2 while   

others have considered it as a jeu      
d'esprit1 c4#a ,the author does not1    
however1 design to entertain his readers
 with accounts of the mistakes which1   
have arisen respecting it2 because many 
of them1 he is convinced1 would be      
received with incredulity2 and he could 
not1 without an indelicate exposure of  
individuals1 verify his anecdotes4  ,but
 some sensible readers have complained  
of the difficulty of determining what   
they are to believe4 ,of the existence  
of ,buonaparte1 indeed1 they remained   
fully convinced2 nor1 if it were left   
doubtful1 would any important results   
ensue2 but if they can give no          
satisfactory reason for their           
conviction1 how can they know1 it is    
asked1 that they may not be mistaken as 
to other points of greater consequence1 
on which they are no less fully         
convinced1 but on which all men are not 
agreed8 ,the author has accordingly been
 solicited to endeavour to frame some   
canons which may furnish a standard for 

determining what evidence is to be      
received4  ,this he conceives to be     
impracticable1 except to that extent to 
which it is accomplished by a sound     
system of ,logic2 including under that  
title1 a portion--that which relates to 
the ,laws of ,evidence--of what is      
sometimes treated under the head of     
,rhetoric4 ,but the full and complete   
accomplishment of such an object would  
confer on ,man the unattainable         
attribute of infallibility4  ,but the   
difficulty complained of1 he conceives  
to arise1 in many instances1 from men's 
mis-stating the grounds of their own    
conviction4 ,they are convinced1 indeed1
 and perhaps with very sufficient       
reason2 but they imagine this reason to 
be a different one from what it is4 ,the
 evidence to which they have assented is
 applied to their minds in a different  
manner from that in which they believe  
that it is--and suppose that it ought to
 be--applied4 ,and when challenged to   
defend and justify their own belief1    

they feel at a loss1 because they are   
attempting to maintain a position which 
is not1 in fact1 that in which their    
force lies4  ,for a development of the  
nature1 the consequences1 and the       
remedies of this mistake1 the reader is 
referred to ,hinds on ,inspiration1 pp4 
#cj-df4 ,if such a development is to be 
found in any earlier works1 the ,author 
of the following pages at least has     
never chanced to meet with any attempt  
of the kind4#b  ,it has been objected1  
again1 by some persons of no great      
logical accuracy of thought1 that as    
there would not be any moral blame      
imputable to one who should seriously   
disbelieve1 or doubt1 the existence of  
,buonaparte1 so neither is a rejection  
of the ,scripture-histories to be       
considered as implying anything morally 
culpable4  ,the same objection1 such as 
it is1 would apply equally to many of   
the ,parables of the ,new ,testament4   
,it might be said1 for instance1 that as
 a woman who should decline taking the  

trouble of searching for her lost piece 
of silver1 or a merchant who should     
neglect making an advantageous purchase 
of a goodly pearl1 would be guilty of no
 moral wrong1 it must follow that there 
is nothing morally wrong in neglecting  
to reclaim a lost sinner1 or in         
rejecting the ,gospel1 c4  ,but any man 
of common sense readily perceives that  
the force of these parables consists in 
the circumstance that men do not usually
 show this carelessness about temporal  
goods2 and1 therefore1 are guilty of    
gross and culpable inconsistency1 if    
they are comparatively careless about   
what is far more important4  ,so1 also1 
in the present case4 ,if any man's mind 
were so constituted as to reject the    
same evidence in all matters alike--if1 
for instance1 he really doubted or      
disbelieved the existence of            
,buonaparte1 and considered the         
,egyptian pyramids as fabulous1 because1
 forsooth1 he had no experience of the  
erection of such huge structures1 and   

had experience of travellers telling    
huge lies--he would be regarded1        
perhaps1 as very silly1 or as insane1   
but not as morally culpable4 ,but if 7as
 is intimated in the concluding sentence
 of this work7 a man is influenced in   
one case by objections which1 in another
 case1 he would deride1 then he stands  
convicted of being unfairly biassed by  
his prejudices4  ,it is only necessary  
to add1 that as this work first appeared
 in the year #ahai1 many things are     
spoken of in the present tense1 to which
 the past would now be applicable4      
,postscripts have been added to         
successive editions in reference to     
subsequent occurrences4   ,,footnotes3  
#a ,it was observed by some reviewer1   
that ,hume himself1 had he been alive1  
would doubtless have highly enjoyed the 
joke6 ,but even those who have the      
greatest delight in ridicule1 do not    
relish jokes at their own expense4 ,hume
 may have inwardly laughed1 while       
mystifying his readers with arguments   

which he himself perceived to be futile4
 ,but he did not mean the readers to    
perceive this4 ,and it is not likely    
that he would have been amused at seeing
 his own fallacies exposed and held up  
to derision4  #b ,see ,elements of      
,rhetoric1 p4 i4 ch4 #b1  #d4         99
       99       99       99       99    
,,historic ,,doubts ,,relative ,,to     
,,napoleon ,,buonaparte4   ,long as the 
public attention has been occupied by   
the extraordinary personage from whose  
ambition we are supposed to have so     
narrowly escaped1 the subject seems to  
have lost scarcely anything of its      
interest4 ,we are still occupied in     
recounting the exploits1 discussing the 
character1 inquiring into the present   
situation1 and even conjecturing as to  
the future prospects of ,napoleon       
,buonaparte4  ,nor is this at all to be 
wondered at1 if we consider the very    
extraordinary nature of those exploits1 
and of that character2 their greatness  
and extensive importance1 as well as the

 unexampled strangeness of the events1  
and also that strong additional         
stimulant1 the mysterious uncertainty   
that hangs over the character of the    
man4 ,if it be doubtful whether any     
history 7exclusive of such as is        
confessedly fabulous7 ever attributed to
 its hero such a series of wonderful    
achievements compressed into so small a 
space of time1 it is certain that to no 
one were ever assigned so many          
dissimilar characters4  ,it is true1    
indeed1 that party-prejudices have drawn
 a favourable and an unfavourable       
portrait of almost every eminent man2   
but amidst all the diversities of       
colouring1 something of the same general
 outline is always distinguishable4 ,and
 even the virtues in the one description
 bear some resemblance to the vices of  
another3 rashness1 for instance1 will be
 called courage1 or courage1 rashness2  
heroic firmness1 and obstinate pride1   
will correspond in the two opposite     
descriptions2 and in some leading       

features both will agree4 ,neither the  
friends nor the enemies of ,philip of   
,macedon1 or of ,julius ,csar1 ever     
questioned their ,,courage1 or their    
,,military ,,skill4  ,with ,buonaparte1 
however1 it has been otherwise4 ,this   
obscure ,corsican adventurer1 a man1    
according to some1 of extraordinary     
talents and courage1 according to       
others1 of very moderate abilities1 and 
a rank coward1 advanced rapidly in the  
,french army1 obtained a high command1  
gained a series of important victories1 
and1 elated by success1 embarked in an  
expedition against ,egypt2 which was    
planned and conducted1 according to     
some1 with the most consummate skill1   
according to others1 with the utmost    
wildness and folly3 he was unsuccessful1
 however2 and leaving the army in ,egypt
 in a very distressed situation1 he     
returned to ,france1 and found the      
nation1 or at least the army1 so        
favourably disposed towards him1 that he
 was enabled1 with the utmost ease1 to  

overthrow the existing government1 and  
obtain for himself the supreme power2 at
 first1 under the modest appellation of 
,consul1 but afterwards with the more   
sounding title of ,emperor4 ,while in   
possession of this power1 he overthrew  
the most powerful coalitions of the     
other ,european ,states against him2 and
 though driven from the sea by the      
,british fleets1 overran nearly the     
whole continent1 triumphant2 finishing a
 war1 not unfrequently1 in a single     
campaign1 he entered the capitals of    
most of the hostile potentates1 deposed 
and created ,kings at his pleasure1 and 
appeared the virtual sovereign of the   
chief part of the continent1 from the   
frontiers of ,spain to those of ,russia4
 ,even those countries we find him      
invading with prodigious armies1        
defeating their forces1 penetrating to  
their capitals1 and threatening their   
total subjugation4 ,but at ,moscow his  
progress is stopped3 a winter of unusual
 severity1 co-operating with the efforts

 of the ,russians1 totally destroys his 
enormous host3 and the ,german          
sovereigns throw off the yoke1 and      
combine to oppose him4 ,he raises       
another vast army1 which is also ruined 
at ,leipsic2 and again another1 with    
which1 like a second ,antus1 he for some
 time maintains himself in ,france2 but 
is finally defeated1 deposed1 and       
banished to the island of ,elba1 of     
which the sovereignty is conferred on   
him4 ,thence he returns1 in about nine  
months1 at the head of #fjj men1 to     
attempt the deposition of ,king ,louis1 
who had been peaceably recalled2 the    
,french nation declare in his favour1   
and he is reinstated without a struggle4
 ,he raises another great army to oppose
 the allied powers1 which is totally    
defeated at ,waterloo2 he is a second   
time deposed1 surrenders to the         
,british1 and is placed in confinement  
at the island of ,st4 ,helena4 ,such is 
the outline of the eventful history     
presented to us2 in the detail of which1

 however1 there is almost every         
conceivable variety of statement2 while 
the motives and conduct of the chief    
actor are involved in still greater     
doubt1 and the subject of still more    
eager controversy4         99       99  
99       99       99  ,in the midst of  
these controversies1 the preliminary    
question1 concerning the existence of   
this extraordinary personage1 seems     
never to have occurred to any one as a  
matter of doubt2 and to show even the   
smallest hesitation in admitting it1    
would probably be regarded as an excess 
of scepticism2 on the ground that this  
point has always been taken for granted 
by the disputants on all sides1 being   
indeed implied by the very nature of    
their disputes4  ,but is it in fact     
found that undisputed points are always 
such as have been the most carefully    
examined as to the evidence on which    
they rest8 that facts or principles     
which are taken for granted1 without    
controversy1 as the common basis of     

opposite opinions1 are always themselves
 established on sufficient grounds8 ,on 
the contrary1 is not any such           
fundamental point1 from the very        
circumstance of its being taken for     
granted at once1 and the attention drawn
 off to some other question1 likely to  
be admitted on insufficient evidence1   
and the flaws in that evidence          
overlooked8  ,experience will teach us  
that such instances often occur3 witness
 the well-known anecdote of the ,royal  
,society2 to whom ,king ,charles ,,ii4  
proposed as a question1 whence it is    
that a vessel of water receives no      
addition of weight from a live fish     
being put into it1 though it does1 if   
the fish be dead4 ,various solutions1 of
 great ingenuity1 were proposed1        
discussed1 objected to1 and defended2   
nor was it till they had been long      
bewildered in the inquiry1 that it      
occurred to them to try the experiment2 
by which they at once ascertained that  
the phenomenon which they were striving 

to account for1--which was the          
acknowledged basis and substratum1 as it
 were1 of their debates1--had no        
existence but in the invention of the   
witty monarch4#c  ,another instance of  
the same kind is so very remarkable that
 ,i cannot forbear mentioning it4 ,it   
was objected to the system of           
,copernicus when first brought forward1 
that if the earth turned on its axis1 as
 he represented1 a stone dropped from   
the summit of a tower would not fall at 
the foot of it1 but at a great distance 
to the west2 in the same manner as a    
stone dropped from the mast-head of a   
ship in full sail1 does not fall at the 
foot of the mast1 but towards the stern4
 ,to this it was answered1 that a stone 
being a part of the earth obeys the same
 laws1 and moves with it2 whereas1 it is
 no part of the ship2 of which1         
consequently1 its motion is independent4
 ,this solution was admitted by some1   
but opposed by others2 and the          
controversy went on with spirit2 nor was

 it till one hundred years after the    
death of ,copernicus1 that the          
experiment being tried1 it was          
ascertained that the stone thus dropped 
from the head of the mast does fall at  
the foot of it6#d  ,let it be observed  
that ,i am not now impugning any one    
particular narrative2 but merely showing
 generally1 that what is unquestioned is
 not necessarily unquestionable2 since  
men will often1 at the very moment when 
they are accurately sifting the evidence
 of some disputed point1 admit hastily1 
and on the most insufficient grounds1   
what they have been accustomed to see   
taken for granted4  ,the celebrated     
,hume#e has pointed out1 also1 the      
readiness with which men believe1 on    
very slight evidence1 any story that    
pleases their imagination by its        
admirable and marvellous character4     
,such hasty credulity1 however1 as he   
well remarks1 is utterly unworthy of a  
philosophical mind2 which should rather 
suspend its judgment the more1 in       

proportion to the strangeness of the    
account1 and yield to none but the most 
decisive and unimpeachable proofs4  ,let
 it1 then1 be allowed us1 as is surely  
reasonable1 just to inquire1 with       
respect to the extraordinary story ,i   
have been speaking of1 on what evidence 
we believe it4 ,we shall be told that it
 is notorious2 i4e41 in plain ,english1 
it is very much talked about4 ,but as   
the generality of those who talk about  
,buonaparte do not even pretend to speak
 from their own authority1 but merely to
 repeat what they have casually heard1  
we cannot reckon them as1 in any degree1
 witnesses2 but must allow ninety-nine  
hundredths of what we are told to be    
mere hearsay1 which would not be at all 
the more worthy of credit even if it    
were repeated by ten times as many more4
 ,as for those who profess to have      
personally known ,napoleon ,buonaparte1 
and to have themselves witnessed his    
transactions1 ,i write not for them4 ,if
 any such there be1 who are inwardly    

conscious of the truth of all they      
relate1 ,i have nothing to say to them1 
but to beg that they will be tolerant   
and charitable towards their neighbours1
 who have not the same means of         
ascertaining the truth1 and who may well
 be excused for remaining doubtful about
 such extraordinary events1 till most   
unanswerable proofs shall be adduced4 ,i
 would not have believed such a thing1  
if ,i had not seen it1 is a common      
preface or appendix to a narrative of   
marvels2 and usually calls forth from an
 intelligent hearer the appropriate     
answer1 no more will ,i4  ,let us1      
however1 endeavour to trace up some of  
this hearsay evidence as far towards its
 source as we are able4 ,most persons   
would refer to the newspapers as the    
authority from which their knowledge on 
the subject was derived2 so that1       
generally speaking1 we may say it is on 
the testimony of the newspapers that men
 believe in the existence and exploits  
of ,napoleon ,buonaparte4  ,it is rather

 a remarkable circumstance1 that it is  
common to hear ,englishmen speak of the 
impudent fabrications of foreign        
newspapers1 and express wonder that any 
one can be found to credit them2 while  
they conceive that1 in this favoured    
land1 the liberty of the press is a     
sufficient security for veracity4 ,it is
 true they often speak contemptuously of
 such newspaper-stories as last but a   
short time2 indeed they continually see 
them contradicted within a day or two in
 the same paper1 or their falsity       
detected by some journal of an opposite 
party2 but still whatever is long       
adhered to and often repeated1          
especially if it also appear in several 
different papers 7and this1 though they 
notoriously copy from one another71 is  
almost sure to be generally believed4   
,whence this high respect which is      
practically paid to newspaper authority8
 ,do men think1 that because a witness  
has been perpetually detected in        
falsehood1 he may therefore be the more 

safely believed whenever he is not      
detected8 or does adherence to a story1 
and frequent repetition of it1 render it
 the more credible8 ,on the contrary1 is
 it not a common remark in other cases1 
that a liar will generally stand to and 
reiterate what he has once said1 merely 
because he has said it8  ,let us1 if    
possible1 divest ourselves of this      
superstitious veneration for everything 
that appears in print1 and examine a    
little more systematically the evidence 
which is adduced4         99       99   
99       99       99  ,i suppose it will
 not be denied that the three following 
are among the most important points to  
be ascertained1 in deciding on the      
credibility of witnesses2 first1 whether
 they have the means of gaining correct 
information2 secondly1 whether they have
 any interest in concealing truth1 or   
propagating falsehood2 and1 thirdly1    
whether they agree in their testimony4  
,let us examine the present witnesses   
upon all these points4  ,first1 what    

means have the editors of newspapers for
 giving correct information8 ,we know   
not1 except from their own statements4  
,besides what is copied from other      
journals1 foreign or ,british1 7which is
 usually more than three-fourths of the 
news published17#f they profess to refer
 to the authority of certain private    
correspondents abroad2 who these        
correspondents are1 what means they have
 of obtaining information1 or whether   
they exist at all1 we have no way of    
ascertaining4 ,we find ourselves in the 
condition of the ,hindoos1 who are told 
by their priests that the earth stands  
on an elephant1 and the elephant on a   
tortoise2 but are left to find out for  
themselves what the tortoise stands on1 
or whether it stands on anything at all4
  ,so much for our clear knowledge of   
the means of information possessed by   
these witnesses2 next1 for the grounds  
on which we are to calculate on their   
veracity4  ,have they not a manifest    
interest in circulating the wonderful   

accounts of ,napoleon ,buonaparte and   
his achievements1 whether true or false8
 ,few would read newspapers if they did 
not sometimes find wonderful or         
important news in them2 and we may      
safely say that no subject was ever     
found so inexhaustibly interesting as   
the present4  ,it may be urged1 however1
 that there are several adverse         
political parties1 of which the various 
public prints are respectively the      
organs1 and who would not fail to expose
 each other's fabrications4#g ,doubtless
 they would1 if they could do so without
 at the same time exposing their own2   
but identity of interests may induce a  
community of operations up to a certain 
point4 ,and let it be observed that the 
object of contention between these rival
 parties is1 who shall have the         
administration of public affairs1 the   
control of public expenditure1 and the  
disposal of places3 the question1 ,i    
say1 is1 not whether the people shall be
 governed or not1 but1 by which party   

they shall be governed2--not whether the
 taxes shall be paid or not1 but who    
shall receive them4 ,now1 it must be    
admitted that ,buonaparte is a political
 bugbear1 most convenient to any        
administration3 if you do not adopt our 
measures and reject those of our        
opponents1 ,buonaparte will be sure to  
prevail over you2 if you do not submit  
to the ,government1 at least under our  
administration1 this formidable enemy   
will take advantage of your             
insubordination1 to conquer and enslave 
you3 pay your taxes cheerfully1 or the  
tremendous ,buonaparte will take all    
from you4 ,buonaparte1 in short1 was the
 burden of every song2 his redoubted    
name was the charm which always         
succeeded in unloosing the purse-strings
 of the nation4 ,and let us not be too  
sure1#h safe as we now think ourselves1 
that some occasion may not occur for    
again producing on the stage so useful a
 personage3 it is not merely to naughty 
children in the nursery that the threat 

of being given to ,buonaparte has proved
 effectual4  ,it is surely probable1    
therefore1 that1 with an object         
substantially the same1 all parties may 
have availed themselves of one common   
instrument4 ,it is not necessary to     
suppose that for this purpose they      
secretly entered into a formal          
agreement2 though1 by the way1 there are
 reports afloat1 that the editors of the
 ,courier and ,morning ,chronicle hold  
amicable consultations as to the conduct
 of their public warfare3 ,i will not   
take upon me to say that this is        
incredible2 but at any rate it is not   
necessary for the establishment of the  
probability ,i contend for4 ,neither    
again would ,i imply that all newspaper 
editors are utterers of forged stories1 
knowing them to be forged2 most likely  
the great majority of them publish what 
they find in other papers with the same 
simplicity that their readers peruse it2
 and therefore1 it must be observed1 are
 not at all more proper than their      

readers to be cited as authorities4     
,still it will be said1 that unless we  
suppose a regularly preconcerted plan1  
we must at least expect to find great   
discrepancies in the accounts published4
 ,though they might adopt the general   
outline of facts from one another1 they 
would have to fill up the detail for    
themselves2 and in this1 therefore1 we  
should meet with infinite and           
irreconcilable variety4  ,now this is   
precisely the point ,i am tending to2   
for the fact exactly accords with the   
above supposition2 the discordance and  
mutual contradictions of these witnesses
 being such as would alone throw a      
considerable shade of doubt over their  
testimony4 ,it is not in minute         
circumstances alone that the discrepancy
 appears1 such as might be expected to  
appear in a narrative substantially     
true2 but in very great and leading     
transactions1 and such as are very      
intimately connected with the supposed  
hero4 ,for instance1 it is by no means  

agreed whether ,buonaparte led in person
 the celebrated charge over the bridge  
of ,lodi1 7for celebrated it certainly  
is1 as well as the siege of ,troy1      
whether either event ever really took   
place or no17 or was safe in the rear1  
while ,augereau performed the exploit4  
,the same doubt hangs over the charge of
 the ,french cavalry at ,waterloo4 ,the 
peasant ,lacoste1 who professed to have 
been ,buonaparte's guide on the day of  
battle1 and who earned a fortune by     
detailing over and over again to        
visitors all the particulars of what the
 great man said and did up to the moment
 of flight1--this same ,lacoste has been
 suspected by others1 besides me1 of    
having never even been near the great   
man1 and having fabricated the whole    
story for the sake of making a gain of  
the credulity of travellers4 ,in the    
accounts that are the extant of the     
battle itself1 published by persons     
professing to have been present1 the    
reader will find that there is a        

discrepancy of three or four hours as to
 the time when the battle began6--a     
battle1 be it remembered1 not fought    
with javelins and arrows1 like those of 
the ancients1 in which one part of a    
large army might be engaged1 whilst a   
distant portion of the same army knew   
nothing of it2 but a battle commencing  
7if indeed it were ever fought at all7  
with the firing of cannon1 which1 would 
have announced pretty loudly what was   
going on4  ,it is no less uncertain     
whether or no this strange personage    
poisoned in ,egypt an hospital--full of 
his own soldiers1 and butchered in cold 
blood a garrison that had surrendered4  
,but not to multiply instances2 the     
battle of ,borodino1 which is           
represented as one of the greatest ever 
fought1 was unequivocally claimed as a  
victory by both parties2 nor is the     
question decided at this day4 ,we have  
official accounts on both sides1        
circumstantially detailed1 in the names 
of supposed respectable persons1        

professing to have been present on the  
spot2 yet totally irreconcilable4 ,both 
these accounts may be false2 but since  
one of them must be false1 that one 7it 
is no matter which we suppose7 proves   
incontrovertibly this important maxim3  
that it is possible for a               
narrative--however                      
circumstantial--however steadily        
maintained--however public1 and however 
important1 the events it                
relates--however grave the authority on 
which it is published--to be            
nevertheless an entire fabrication6     
,many of the events which have been     
recorded were probably believed much the
 more readily and firmly1 from the      
apparent caution and hesitation with    
which they were at first published--the 
vehement contradiction in our papers of 
many pretended ,french accounts--and the
 abuse lavished upon them for falsehood1
 exaggeration1 and gasconade4 ,but is it
 not possible--is it not1 indeed1       
perfectly natural--that the publishers  

even of known falsehood should assume   
this cautious demeanour1 and this       
abhorrence of exaggeration1 in order the
 more easily to gain credit8 ,is it not 
also very possible1 that those who      
actually believed what they published1  
may have suspected mere exaggeration in 
stories which were entire fictions8     
,many men have that sort of simplicity1 
that they think themselves quite secure 
against being deceived1 provided they   
believe only part of the story they     
hear2 when perhaps the whole is equally 
false4 ,so that perhaps these           
simple-hearted editors1 who were so     
vehement against lying bulletins1 and so
 wary in announcing their great news1   
were in the condition of a clown1 who   
thinks he has bought a great bargain of 
a ,jew because he has beat down the     
price perhaps from a guinea to a crown1 
for some article that is not really     
worth a groat4  ,with respect to the    
character of ,buonaparte1 the dissonance
 is1 if possible1 still greater4        

,according to some1 he was a wise1      
humane1 magnanimous hero2 others paint  
him as a monster of cruelty1 meanness1  
and perfidy3 some1 even of those who are
 most inveterate against him1 speak very
 highly of his political and military   
ability3 others place him on the very   
verge of insanity4 ,but allowing that   
all this may be the colouring of        
party-prejudice1 7which surely is       
allowing a great deal17 there is one    
point to which such a solution will     
hardly apply3 if there be anything that 
can be clearly ascertained in history1  
one would think it must be the personal 
courage of a military man2 yet here we  
are as much at a loss as ever2 at the   
very same times1 and on the same        
occasions1 he is described by different 
writers as a man of undaunted           
intrepidity1 and as an absolute         
poltroon4  ,what1 then1 are we to       
believe8 ,if we are disposed to credit  
all that is told us1 we must believe in 
the existence not only of one1 but of   

two or three ,buonapartes2 if we admit  
nothing but what is well authenticated1 
we shall be compelled to doubt of the   
existence of any4#i  ,it appears1 then1 
that those on whose testimony the       
existence and actions of ,buonaparte are
 generally believed1 fail in ,,all the  
most essential points on which the      
credibility of witnesses depends3 first1
 we have no assurance that they have    
access to correct information2 secondly1
 they have an apparent interest in      
propagating falsehood2 and1 thirdly1    
they palpably contradict each other in  
the most important points4         99   
99       99       99       99  ,another 
circumstance which throws additional    
suspicion on these tales is1 that the   
whig-party1 as they are called--the warm
 advocates for liberty1 and opposers of 
the encroachments of monarchical        
power--have for some time past          
strenuously espoused the cause and      
vindicated the character of ,buonaparte1
 who is represented by all as having    

been1 if not a tyrant1 at least an      
absolute despot4 ,one of the most       
forward in this cause is a gentleman1   
who once stood foremost in holding up   
this very man to public execration--who 
first published1 and long maintained    
against popular incredulity1 the        
accounts of his atrocities in ,egypt4   
,now that such a course should be       
adopted for party-purposes2 by those who
 are aware that the whole story is a    
fiction1 and the hero of it imaginary1  
seems not very incredible2 but if they  
believed in the real existence of this  
despot1 ,i cannot conceive how they     
could so forsake their principles as to 
advocate his cause1 and eulogize his    
character4  ,besides the many strange   
and improbable circumstances in the     
history of ,buonaparte that have been   
already noticed1 there are many others1 
two of which it may be worth while to   
advert to4  ,one of the most incredible 
is the received account of the persons  
known as the ,dtenus4 ,it is well known 

that a great number of ,english         
gentlemen passed many years1 in the     
early part of the present century1      
abroad2--by their own account1 in       
,france4 ,their statement was1 that     
while travelling in that country for    
their amusement1 as peaceable tourists1 
they were1 on the sudden breaking out of
 a war1 seized by this terrible         
,buonaparte1 and kept prisoners for     
about twelve years1 contrary to all the 
usages of civilized nations--to all     
principles of justice1 of humanity1 of  
enlightened policy2 many of them thus   
wasting in captivity the most important 
portion of their lives1 and having all  
their prospects blighted4  ,now whether 
these persons were in reality exiles by 
choice1 for the sake of keeping out of  
the way of creditors1 or of enjoying the
 society of those they preferred to     
their own domestic circle1 ,i do not    
venture to conjecture4 ,but let the     
reader consider whether any conjecture  
can be more improbable than the         

statement actually made4  ,it is1       
indeed1 credible that ambition may      
prompt an unscrupulous man to make the  
most enormous sacrifices of human life1 
and to perpetrate the most atrocious    
crimes1 for the advancement of his views
 of conquest4 ,but that this great      
man--as he is usually reckoned even by  
adversaries--this hero according to     
some--this illustrious warrior1 and     
mighty sovereign--should have stooped to
 be guilty of an act of mean and petty  
malice worthy of a spiteful old         
woman1--a piece of paltry cruelty which 
could not at all conduce to his success 
in the war1 or produce any effect except
 to degrade his country1 and exasperate 
ours2--this1 surely1 is quite           
incredible4 ,pizarro1 says ,elvira in   
,kotzebue's play1 if not always justly1 
at least act always greatly4  ,but a    
still more wonderful circumstance       
connected with this transaction remains 
behind4 ,a large portion of the ,english
 nation1 and among these the whole of   

the ,whig party1 are said to have       
expressed the most vehement indignation1
 mingled with compassion1 at the        
banishment from ,europe1 and confinement
 in ,st4 ,helena1 of this great man4 ,no
 considerations of regard for the peace 
and security of our own country1 no     
dread of the power of so able and       
indefatigable a warrior1 and so         
inveterate an enemy1 should have induced
 us1 they thought1 to subject this      
formidable personage to a confinement1  
which was far less severe than that to  
which he was said to have subjected such
 numbers of our countrymen1 the harmless
 non-belligerent travellers1 whom       
7according to the story7 he kidnapped in
 ,france1 with no object but to gratify 
the basest and most unmanly spite4  ,but
 that there is no truth in that story1  
and that it was not believed by those   
who manifested so much sympathy and     
indignation on this great man's account1
 is sufficiently proved by that very    
sympathy and indignation4  ,there are   

again other striking improbabilities    
connected with the ,polish nation in the
 history before us4 ,buonaparte is      
represented as having always expressed  
the strongest sympathy with that        
ill-used people2 and they1 as being     
devotedly attached to him1 and fighting 
with the utmost fidelity and bravery in 
his armies1 in which some of them       
attained high commands4 ,now he had it  
manifestly in his power at one period   
7according to the received accounts71   
with a stroke of his pen1 to            
re-establish ,poland as an independent  
state4 ,for1 in his last ,russian war1  
he had complete occupation of the       
country 7of which the population was    
perfectly friendly72 the ,russian       
portion of it was his by right of       
conquest2 and ,austria and ,prussia1    
then his allies1 and almost his         
subjects1 would gladly have resigned    
their portions in exchange for some of  
the provinces they had ceded to ,france1
 and which were1 to him1 of little      

value1 but1 to them1 important4 ,and1   
indeed1 ,prussia was 7as we are told7 so
 thoroughly humbled and weakened that he
 might easily have enforced the cession 
of ,prussian-,poland1 even without any  
compensation4 ,and the re-establishment 
of the ,polish kingdom would have been  
as evidently politic as it was          
reasonable4 ,the independence of a      
faithful and devoted ally1 at enmity    
with the surrounding nations--the very  
nations that were the most likely to    
combine 7as they often had done7 against
 him1--this would have given him1 at no 
cost1 a kind of strong garrison to      
maintain his power1 and keep his enemies
 in check4  ,yet this most obvious step1
 the history tells us1 he did not take2 
but made flattering speeches to the     
,poles1 used their services1 and did    
nothing for them6  ,this is1 alone1     
sufficiently improbable4 ,but we are    
required moreover to believe that the   
,poles1--instead of execrating this man1
 who had done them the unpardonable     

wrong of wantonly disappointing the     
expectations he had1 for his own        
purposes1 excited1 thus adding treachery
 to ingratitude--instead of this1       
continued to the last as much devoted to
 him as ever1 and even now idolize his  
memory6 ,we are to believe1 in short1   
that this ,buonaparte1 not only in his  
own conduct and adventures violated all 
the established rules of probability1   
but also caused all other persons1 as   
many as came in contact with him1 to act
 as no mortals ever did act before3 may 
we not add1 as no mortals ever did act  
at all8  ,many other improbabilities    
might be added to the list1 and will be 
found in the complete edition of that   
history1 from which some extracts will  
be presently given1 and which has been  
published 7under the title of ,historic 
,certainties7 by ,aristarchus ,newlight1
 with a learned commentary 7not1 indeed1
 adopting the views contained in these  
pages1 but7 quite equal in ingenuity to 
a late work on the ,hebrew ,monarchy4   

,after all1 it may be expected that many
 who perceive the force of these        
objections1 will yet be loth to think it
 possible that they and the public at   
large can have been so long and so      
greatly imposed upon4 ,and thus it is   
that the magnitude and boldness of a    
fraud becomes its best support4 ,the    
millions who for so many ages have      
believed in ,mahomet or ,brahma1 lean as
 it were on each other for support2 and 
not having vigour of mind enough boldly 
to throw off vulgar prejudices1 and dare
 be wiser than the multitude1 persuade  
themselves that what so many have       
acknowledged must be true4 ,but ,i call 
on those who boast their philosophical  
freedom of thought1 and would fain tread
 in the steps of ,hume and other        
inquirers of the like exalted and       
speculative genius1 to follow up fairly 
and fully their own principles1 and1    
throwing off the shackles of authority1 
to examine carefully the evidence of    
whatever is proposed to them1 before    

they admit its truth4  ,that even in    
this enlightened age1 as it is called1 a
 whole nation may be egregiously imposed
 upon1 even in matters which intimately 
concern them1 may be proved 7if it has  
not been already proved7 by the         
following instance3 it was stated in the
 newspapers1 that1 a month after the    
battle of ,trafalgar1 an ,english       
officer1 who had been a prisoner of war1
 and was exchanged1 returned to this    
country from ,france1 and beginning to  
condole with his countrymen on the      
terrible defeat they had sustained1 was 
infinitely astonished to learn that the 
battle of ,trafalgar was a splendid     
victory4 ,he had been assured1 he said1 
that in that battle the ,english had    
been totally defeated2 and the ,french  
were fully and universally persuaded    
that such was the fact4 ,now if this    
report of the belief of the ,french     
nation was not true1 the ,british       
,public were completely imposed upon2 if
 it were true1 then both nations were1  

at the same time1 rejoicing in the event
 of the same battle1 as a signal victory
 to themselves2 and consequently one or 
other1 at least1 of these nations must  
have been the dupes of their government3
 for if the battle was never fought at  
all1 or was not decisive on either side1
 in that case both parties were         
deceived4 ,this instance1 ,i conceive1  
is absolutely demonstrative of the point
 in question4  ,but what shall we say to
 the testimony of those many respectable
 persons who went to ,plymouth on       
purpose1 and saw ,buonaparte with their 
own eyes8 must they not trust their     
senses8 ,i would not disparage either   
the eyesight or the veracity of these   
gentlemen4 ,i am ready to allow that    
they went to ,plymouth for the purpose  
of seeing ,buonaparte2 nay1 more1 that  
they actually rowed out into the harbour
 in a boat1 and came alongside of a     
man-of-war1 on whose deck they saw a man
 in a cocked hat1 who1 they were told1  
was ,buonaparte4 ,this is the utmost    

point to which their testimony goes2 how
 they ascertained that this man in the  
cocked hat had gone through all the     
marvellous and romantic adventures with 
which we have so long been amused1 we   
are not told4 ,did they perceive in his 
physiognomy1 his true name1 and         
authentic history8 ,truly this evidence 
is such as country people give one for a
 story of apparitions2 if you discover  
any signs of incredulity1 they          
triumphantly show the very house which  
the ghost haunted1 the identical dark   
corner where it used to vanish1 and     
perhaps even the tombstone of the person
 whose death it foretold4 ,jack ,cade's 
nobility was supported by the same      
irresistible kind of evidence3 having   
asserted that the eldest son of ,edmund 
,mortimer1 ,earl of ,march1 was stolen  
by a beggar-woman1 became a bricklayer  
when he came to age1 and was the father 
of the supposed ,jack ,cade2 one of his 
companions confirms the story1 by       
saying1 ,sir1 he made a chimney in my   

father's house1 and the bricks are alive
 at this day to testify it2 therefore1  
deny it not4  ,much of the same kind is 
the testimony of our brave countrymen1  
who are ready to produce the scars they 
received in fighting against this       
terrible ,buonaparte4 ,that they fought 
and were wounded1 they may safely       
testify2 and probably they no less      
firmly believe what they were told      
respecting the cause in which they      
fought3 it would have been a high breach
 of discipline to doubt it2 and they1 ,i
 conceive1 are men better skilled in    
handling a musket1 than in sifting      
evidence1 and detecting imposture4 ,but 
,i defy any one of them to come forward 
and declare1 on his own knowledge1 what 
was the cause in which he fought1--under
 whose commands the opposed generals    
acted1--and whether the person who      
issued those commands did really perform
 the mighty achievements we are told of4
  ,let those1 then1 who pretend to      
philosophical freedom of inquiry1--who  

scorn to rest their opinions on popular 
belief1 and to shelter themselves under 
the example of the unthinking multitude1
 consider carefully1 each one for       
himself1 what is the evidence proposed  
to himself in particular1 for the       
existence of such a person as ,napoleon 
,buonaparte3--,i do not mean1 whether   
there ever was a person bearing that    
name1 for that is a question of no      
consequence2 but whether any such person
 ever performed all the wonderful things
 attributed to him2--let him then weigh 
well the objections to that evidence1   
7of which ,i have given but a hasty and 
imperfect sketch17 and if he then finds 
it amount to anything more than a       
probability1 ,i have only to            
congratulate him on his easy faith4     
99       99       99       99       99  
,but the same testimony which would have
 great weight in establishing a thing   
intrinsically probable1 will lose part  
of this weight in proportion as the     
matter attested is improbable2 and if   

adduced in support of anything that is  
at variance with uniform experience1#aj 
will be rejected at once by all sound   
reasoners4 ,let us then consider what   
sort of a story it is that is proposed  
to our acceptance4 ,how grossly         
contradictory are the reports of the    
different authorities1 ,i have already  
remarked3 but consider1 by itself1 the  
story told by any one of them2 it       
carries an air of fiction and romance on
 the very face of it4 ,all the events   
are great1 and splendid1 and            
marvellous2#aa great armies1--great     
victories1--great frosts1--great        
reverses1--hair-breadth                 
'scapes1--empires subverted in a few    
days2 everything happened in defiance of
 political calculations1 and in         
opposition to the experience of past    
times2 everything upon that grand scale1
 so common in ,epic ,poetry1 so rare in 
real life2 and thus calculated to strike
 the imagination of the vulgar1 and to  
remind the sober-thinking few of the    

,arabian ,nights4 ,every event1 too1 has
 that roundness and completeness which  
is so characteristic of fiction2 nothing
 is done by halves2 we have complete    
victories1--total overthrows1 entire    
subversion of empires1--perfect         
re-establishments of them1--crowded upon
 us in rapid succession4 ,to enumerate  
the improbabilities of each of the      
several parts of this history1 would    
fill volumes2 but they are so fresh in  
every one's memory1 that there is no    
need of such a detail3 let any judicious
 man1 not ignorant of history and of    
human nature1 revolve them in his mind1 
and consider how far they are           
conformable to ,experience1#ab our best 
and only sure guide4 ,in vain will he   
seek in history for something similar to
 this wonderful ,buonaparte2 nought but 
himself can be his parallel4  ,will the 
conquests of ,alexander be compared with
 his8 ,they were effected over a rabble 
of effeminate1 undisciplined barbarians2
 else his progress would hardly have    

been so rapid3 witness his father       
,philip1 who was much longer occupied in
 subduing the comparatively             
insignificant territory of the warlike  
and civilized ,greeks1 notwithstanding  
their being divided into numerous petty 
,states1 whose mutual jealousy enabled  
him to contend with them separately4    
,but the ,greeks had never made such    
progress in arts and arms as the great  
and powerful ,states of ,europe1 which  
,buonaparte is represented as so        
speedily overpowering4 ,his empire has  
been compared to the ,roman3 mark the   
contrast2 he gains in a few years1 that 
dominion1 or at least control1 over     
,germany1 wealthy1 civilized1 and       
powerful1 which the ,romans in the      
plenitude of their power1 could not     
obtain1 during a struggle of as many    
centuries1 against the ignorant         
half-savages who then possessed it2 of  
whom ,tacitus remarks1 that1 up to his  
own time they had been triumphed over   
rather than conquered4  ,another        

peculiar circumstance in the history of 
this extraordinary personage is1 that   
when it ,is found convenient to         
represent him as defeated1 though he is 
by no means defeated by halves1 but     
involved in much more sudden and total  
ruin than the personages of real history
 usually meet with2 yet1 if it is       
thought fit he should be restored1 it is
 done as quickly and completely as if   
,merlin's rod had been employed4 ,he    
enters ,russia with a prodigious army1  
which is totally ruined by an           
unprecedented hard winter2 7everything  
relating to this man is prodigious and  
unprecedented27 yet in a few months we  
find him intrusted with another great   
army in ,germany1 which is also totally 
ruined at ,leipsic2 making1 inclusive of
 the ,egyptian1 the third great army    
thus totally lost3 yet the ,french are  
so good-natured as to furnish him with  
another sufficient to make a formidable 
stand in ,france2 he is1 however1       
conquered1 and presented with the       

sovereignty of ,elba2 7surely1 by the   
bye1 some more probable way might have  
been found of disposing of him1 till    
again wanted1 than to place him thus on 
the very verge of his ancient           
dominions27 thence he returns to        
,france1 where he is received with open 
arms1 and enabled to lose a fifth great 
army at ,waterloo2 yet so eager were    
these people to be a sixth time led to  
destruction1 that it was found necessary
 to confine him in an island some       
thousand miles off1 and to quarter      
foreign troops upon them1 lest they     
should make an insurrection in his      
favour8#ac ,does any one believe all    
this1 and yet refuse to believe a       
miracle8 ,or rather1 what is this but a 
miracle8 ,is it not a violation of the  
laws of nature8 for surely there are    
moral laws of nature as well as         
physical2 which though more liable to   
exceptions in this or that particular   
case1 are no less true as general rules 
than the laws of matter1 and therefore  

cannot be violated and contradicted     
beyond a certain point1 without a       
miracle4#ad  ,nay1 there is this        
additional circumstance which renders   
the contradiction of ,experience more   
glaring in this case than in that of the
 miraculous histories which ingenious   
sceptics have held up to contempt3 all  
the advocates of miracles admit that    
they are rare exceptions to the general 
course of nature2 but contend that they 
must needs be so1 on account of the     
rarity of those extraordinary occasions 
which are the reason of their being     
performed3 a ,miracle1 they say1 does   
not happen every day1 because a         
,revelation is not given every day4 ,it 
would be foreign to the present purpose 
to seek for arguments against this      
answer2 ,i leave it to those who are    
engaged in the controversy1 to find a   
reply to it2 but my present object is1  
to point out that this solution does not
 at all apply in the present case4      
,where is the peculiarity of the        

occasion8 ,what sufficient reason is    
there for a series of events occurring  
in the eighteenth and nineteenth        
centuries1 which never took place       
before8 ,was ,europe at that period     
peculiarly weak1 and in a state of      
barbarism1 that one man could achieve   
such conquests1 and acquire such a vast 
empire8 ,on the contrary1 she was       
flourishing in the height of strength   
and civilization4 ,can the persevering  
attachment and blind devotedness of the 
,french to this man1 be accounted for by
 his being the descendant of a long line
 of kings1 whose race was hallowed by   
hereditary veneration8 ,no2 we are told 
he was a low-born usurper1 and not even 
a ,frenchman6 ,is it that he was a good 
and kind sovereign8 ,he is represented  
not only as an imperious and merciless  
despot1 but as most wantonly careless of
 the lives of his soldiers4 ,could the  
,french army and people have failed to  
hear from the wretched survivors of his 
supposed ,russian expedition1 how they  

had left the corpses of above #ajj1jjj  
of their comrades bleaching on the      
snow-drifts of that dismal country1     
whither his mad ambition had conducted  
him1 and where his selfish cowardice had
 deserted them8 ,wherever we turn to    
seek for circumstances that may help to 
account for the events of this          
incredible story1 we only meet with such
 as aggravate its improbability4#ae ,had
 it been told of some distant country1  
at a remote period1 we could not have   
told what peculiar circumstances there  
might have been to render probable what 
seems to us most strange2 and yet in    
that case every philosophical sceptic1  
every free-thinking speculator1 would   
instantly have rejected such a history1 
as utterly unworthy of credit4 ,what1   
for instance1 would the great ,hume1 or 
any of the philosophers of his school1  
have said1 if they had found in the     
antique records of any nation1 such a   
passage as this8 ,there was a certain   
man of ,corsica1 whose name was         

,napoleon1 and he was one of the chief  
captains of the host of the ,french2 and
 he gathered together an army1 and went 
and fought against ,egypt3 but when the 
king of ,britain heard thereof1 he sent 
ships of war and valiant men to fight   
against the ,french in ,egypt4 ,so they 
warred against them1 and prevailed1 and 
strengthened the hands of the rulers of 
the land against the ,french1 and drave 
away ,napoleon from before the city of  
,acre4 ,then ,napoleon left the captains
 and the army that were in ,egypt1 and  
fled1 and returned back to ,france4 ,so 
the ,french people1 took ,napoleon1 and 
made him ruler over them1 and he became 
exceeding great1 insomuch that there was
 none like him of all that had ruled    
over ,france before4  ,what1 ,i say1    
would ,hume have thought of this1       
especially if he had been told that it  
was at this day generally credited8     
,would he not have confessed that he had
 been mistaken in supposing there was a 
peculiarly blind credulity and prejudice

 in favour of everything that is        
accounted sacred2#af for that1 since    
even professed sceptics swallow         
implicitly such a story as this1 it     
appears there must be a still blinder   
prejudice in favour of everything that  
is not accounted sacred8  ,suppose1     
again1 we found in this history such    
passages as the following3 ,and it came 
to pass after these things that         
,napoleon strengthened himself1 and     
gathered together another host instead  
of that which he had lost1 and went and 
warred against the ,prussians1 and the  
,russians1 and the ,austrians1 and all  
the rulers of the north country1 which  
were confederate against him4 ,and the  
ruler of ,sweden1 also1 which was a     
,frenchman1 warred against ,napoleon4   
,so they went forth1 and fought against 
the ,french in the plain of ,leipsic4   
,and the ,french were discomfited before
 their enemies1 and fled1 and came to   
the rivers which are behind ,leipsic1   
and essayed to pass over1 that they     

might escape out of the hand of their   
enemies2 but they could not1 for        
,napoleon had broken down the bridges3  
so the people of the north countries    
came upon them1 and smote them with a   
very grievous slaughter4 444         99 
99       99       99       99  ,then the
 ruler of ,austria and all the rulers of
 the north countries sent messengers    
unto ,napoleon to speak peaceably unto  
him1 saying1 ,why should there be war   
between us any more8 ,now ,napoleon had 
put away his wife1 and taken the        
daughter of the ruler of ,austria to    
wife4 ,so all the counsellors of        
,napoleon came and stood before him1 and
 said1 ,behold now these kings are      
merciful kings2 do even as they say unto
 thee2 knowest thou not yet that ,france
 is destroyed8 ,but he spake roughly    
unto his counsellors1 and drave them1   
out from his presence1 neither would he 
hearken unto their voice4 ,and when all 
the kings saw that1 they warred against 
,france1 and smote it with the edge of  

the sword1 and came near to ,paris1     
which is the royal city1 to take it3 so 
the men of ,paris went out1 and         
delivered up the city to them4 ,then    
those kings spake kindly unto the men of
 ,paris1 saying1 ,be of good cheer1     
there shall no harm happen unto you4    
,then were the men of ,paris glad1 and  
said1 ,napoleon is a tyrant2 he shall no
 more rule over us4 ,also all the       
princes1 the judges1 the counsellors1   
and the captains whom ,napoleon had     
raised up even from the lowest of the   
people1 sent unto ,lewis the brother of 
,king ,lewis1 whom they had slain1 and  
made him king over ,france4 444  444 444
 444 444 444 444 444  ,and when         
,napoleon saw that the kingdom was      
departed from him1 he said unto the     
rulers which came against him1 ,let me1 
,i pray you1 give the kingdom unto my   
son3 but they would not hearken unto    
him4 ,then he spake yet again1 saying1  
,let me1 ,i pray you1 go and live in the
 island of ,elba1 which is over against 

,italy1 nigh unto the coast of ,france2 
and ye shall give me an allowance for me
 and my household1 and the land of ,elba
 also for a possession4 ,so they made   
him ruler of ,elba4444  444 444 444 444 
444 444 444  ,in those days the ,pope   
returned unto his own land4 ,now the    
,french1 and divers other nations of    
,europe1 are servants of the ,pope1 and 
hold him in reverence2 but he is an     
abomination unto the ,britons1 and to   
the ,prussians1 and to the ,russians1   
and to the ,swedes4 ,howbeit the ,french
 had taken away all his lands1 and      
robbed him of all that he had1 and      
carried him away captive into ,france4  
,but when the ,britons1 and the         
,prussians1 and the ,russians1 and the  
,swedes1 and the rest of the nations    
that were confederate against ,france1  
came thither1 they caused the ,french to
 set the ,pope at liberty1 and to       
restore all his goods that they had     
taken2 likewise they gave him back all  
his possessions2 and he went home in    

peace1 and ruled over his own city as in
 times past4444  444 444 444 444 444 444
 444  ,and it came to pass when         
,napoleon had not yet been a full year  
at ,elba1 that he said unto his men of  
war that clave unto him1 ,go to1 let us 
go back to ,france1 and fight against   
,king ,lewis1 and thrust him out from   
being king4 ,so he departed1 he and six 
hundred men with him that drew the      
sword1 and warred against ,king ,lewis4 
,then all the men of ,belial gathered   
themselves together1 and said1 ,god save
 ,napoleon4 ,and when ,lewis saw that1  
he fled1 and gat him into the land of   
,batavia3 and ,napoleon ruled over      
,france1 c4 c4 c4#ag  ,now if a         
free-thinking philosopher--one of those 
who advocate the cause of unbiassed     
reason1 and despise pretended           
revelations--were to meet with such a   
tissue of absurdities as this in an old 
,jewish record1 would he not reject it  
at once as too palpable an imposture#ah 
to deserve even any inquiry into its    

evidence8 ,is that credible then of the 
civilized ,europeans now1 which could   
not1 if reported of the semi-barbarous  
,jews #cjjj years ago1 be established by
 any testimony8 ,will it be answered1   
that there is nothing supernatural in   
all this8 ,why is it1 then1 that you    
object to what is supernatural--that you
 reject every account of miracles--if   
not because they are improbable8 ,surely
 then a story equally or still more     
improbable1 is not to be implicitly     
received1 merely on the ground that it  
is not miraculous3 though in fact1 as ,i
 have already 7in note1 p4 #ci17 shown  
from ,hume's authority1 it is really    
miraculous4 ,the opposition to          
,experience has been proved to be as    
complete in this case1 as in what are   
commonly called miracles2 and the       
reasons assigned for that contrariety by
 the defenders of them1 cannot be       
pleaded in the present instance4 ,if    
then philosophers1 who reject every     
wonderful story that is maintained by   

priests1 are yet found ready to believe 
everything else1 however improbable1    
they will surely lay themselves open to 
the accusation brought against them of  
being unduly prejudiced against whatever
 relates to religion4         99        
99       99       99       99  ,there is
 one more circumstance which ,i cannot  
forbear mentioning1 because it so much  
adds to the air of fiction which        
pervades every part of this marvellous  
tale2 and that is1 the nationality of   
it4#ai  ,buonaparte prevailed over all  
the hostile ,states in turn1 except     
,england2 in the zenith of his power1   
his fleets were swept from the sea1 by  
,england2 his troops always defeat an   
equal1 and frequently even a superior   
number of those of any other nation1    
except the ,english2 and with them it is
 just the reverse2 twice1 and twice     
only1 he is personally engaged against  
an ,english commander1 and both times he
 is totally defeated2 at ,acre1 and at  
,waterloo2 and to crown all1 ,england   

finally crushes this tremendous power1  
which had so long kept the continent in 
subjection or in alarm2 and to the      
,english he surrenders himself prisoner6
 ,thoroughly national1 to be sure6 ,it  
may be all very true2 but ,i would only 
ask1 if a story had been fabricated for 
the express purpose of amusing the      
,english nation1 could it have been     
contrived more ingeniously8 ,it would do
 admirably for an epic poem2 and indeed 
bears a considerable resemblance to the 
,iliad and the neid2 in which ,achilles 
and the ,greeks1 neas and the ,trojans1 
7the ancestors of the ,romans7 are so   
studiously held up to admiration4       
,buonaparte's exploits seem magnified in
 order to enhance the glory of his      
conquerors2 just as ,hector is allowed  
to triumph during the absence of        
,achilles1 merely to give additional    
splendour to his overthrow by the arm of
 that invincible hero4 ,would not this  
circumstance alone render a history     
rather suspicious in the eyes of an     

acute critic1 even if it were not filled
 with such gross improbabilities2 and   
induce him to suspend his judgment1 till
 very satisfactory evidence 7far        
stronger than can be found in this case7
 should be produced8  ,is it then too   
much to demand of the wary academic#bj a
 suspension of judgment as to the life  
and adventures of ,napoleon ,buonaparte8
 ,i do not pretend to decide positively 
that there is not1 nor ever was1 any    
such person2 but merely to propose it as
 a doubtful point1 and one the more     
deserving of careful investigation1 from
 the very circumstance of its having    
hitherto been admitted without inquiry4 
,far less would ,i undertake to decide  
what is or has been the real state of   
affairs4 ,he who points out the         
improbability of the current story1 is  
not bound to suggest an hypothesis of   
his own2#ba though it may safely be     
affirmed1 that it would be hard to      
invent any one more improbable than the 
received one4 ,one may surely be allowed

 to hesitate in admitting the stories   
which the ancient poets tell1 of        
earthquakes and volcanic eruptions being
 caused by imprisoned giants1 without   
being called upon satisfactorily to     
account for those phenomena4  ,amidst   
the defect of valid evidence under      
which1 as ,i have already shown1 we     
labour in the present instance1 it is   
hardly possible to offer more than here 
and there a probable conjecture2 or to  
pronounce how much may be true1 and how 
much fictitious1 in the accounts        
presented to us4 ,for1 it is to be      
observed that this case is much more    
open to sceptical doubts even than some 
miraculous histories2 since some of them
 are of such a nature that you cannot   
consistently admit a part and reject the
 rest2 but are bound1 if you are        
satisfied as to the reality of any one  
miracle1 to embrace the whole system2 so
 that it is necessary for the sceptic to
 impeach the evidence of all of them1   
separately1 and collectively3 whereas1  

here1 each single point requires to be  
established separately1 since no one of 
them authenticates the rest4 ,supposing 
there be a state-prisoner at ,st4       
,helena1 7which1 by the way1 it is      
acknowledged many of the ,french        
disbelieve17 how do we know who he is1  
or why he is confined there8 ,there have
 been state-prisoners before now1 who   
were never guilty of subjugating half   
,europe1 and whose offences have been   
very imperfectly ascertained4 ,admitting
 that there have been bloody wars going 
on for several years past1 which is     
highly probable1 it does not follow that
 the events of those wars were such as  
we have been told2--that ,buonaparte was
 the author and conductor of them2--or  
that such a person ever existed4 ,what  
disturbances may have taken place in the
 government of the ,french people1 we1  
and even nineteen-twentieths of them1   
have no means of learning but from      
imperfect hearsay evidence2 and how much
 credit they themselves attach to that  

evidence is very doubtful4 ,this at     
least is certain3 that a ,m4 ,berryer1 a
 ,french advocate1 has published        
memoirs1 professing to record many of   
the events of the recent history of     
,france1 in which1 among other things1  
he states his conviction that           
,buonaparte's escape from ,elba was     
,,designed ,,and ,,contrived ,,by ,,the 
,,english ,,government4#bb ,and we are  
assured by many travellers that this    
was1 and is1 commonly reported in       
,france4  ,now that the ,french should  
believe the whole story about           
,buonaparte according to this version of
 it1 does seem utterly incredible4 ,let 
any one suppose them seriously believing
 that we maintained for many years a    
desperate struggle against this         
formidable emperor of theirs1 in the    
course of which we expended such an     
enormous amount of blood and treasure as
 is reported2--that we finally1 after   
encountering enormous risks1 succeeded  
in subduing him1 and secured him in a   

place of safe exile2--and that1 in less 
than a year after1 we turned him out    
again1 like a bag-fox1--or rather1 a    
bag-lion1--for the sake of amusing      
ourselves by again staking all that was 
dear to us on the event of a doubtful   
and bloody battle1 in which defeat must 
be ruinous1 and victory1 if obtained at 
all1 must cost us many thousands of our 
best soldiers4 ,let any one force       
himself for a moment to conceive the    
,french seriously believing such a mass 
of absurdity2 and the inference must be 
that such a people must be prepared to  
believe anything4 ,they might fancy     
their own country to abound not only    
with ,napoleons1 but with dragons and   
centaurs1 and men whose heads do grow   
beneath their shoulders1 or anything    
else that any lunatic ever dreamt of4   
,if we could suppose the ,french capable
 of such monstrous credulity as the     
above supposition would imply1 it is    
plain their testimony must be altogether
 worthless4  ,but1 on the other hand1   

suppose them to be aware that the       
,british ,government have been all along
 imposing on us1 and it is quite natural
 that they should deride our credulity1 
and try whether there is anything too   
extravagant for us to swallow4 ,and     
indeed1 if ,buonaparte was in fact      
altogether a phantom conjured up by the 
,british ,ministers1 then it is true    
that his escape from ,elba really was1  
as well as the rest of his exploits1 a  
contrivance of theirs4         99       
99       99       99       99  ,but     
whatever may be believed by the ,french 
relative to the recent occurrences1 in  
their own country1 and whatever may be  
the real character of these occurrences1
 of this at least we are well assured1  
that there have been numerous bloody    
wars with ,france under the dominion of 
the ,bourbons3 and we are now told that 
,france is governed by a ,bourbon king1 
of the name of ,lewis1 who professes to 
be in the twenty-third year of his      
reign4 ,let every one conjecture for    

himself4 ,i am far from pretending to   
decide who may have been the governor or
 governors of the ,french nation1 and   
the leaders of their armies1 for several
 years past4 ,certain it is1 that when  
men are indulging their inclination for 
the marvellous1 they always show a      
strong propensity to accumulate upon one
 individual 7real or imaginary7 the     
exploits of many2 besides multiplying   
and exaggerating these exploits a       
thousandfold4 ,thus1 the expounders of  
the ancient mythology tell us there were
 several persons of the name of         
,hercules1 7either originally bearing   
that appellation1 or having it applied  
to them as an honour17 whose collective 
feats1 after being dressed up in a      
sufficiently marvellous garb1 were      
attributed to a single hero4 ,is it not 
just possible1 that during the rage for 
words of ,greek derivation1 the title of
 ,napoleon1 717 which signifies ,lion of
 the forest1 may have been conferred by 
the popular voice on more than one      

favorite general1 distinguished for     
irresistible valour8 ,is it not also    
possible that ,,buona ,,parte may have  
been originally a sort of cant term     
applied to the good 7i4e41 the bravest  
or most patriotic7 part of the ,french  
army1 collectively2 and have been       
afterwards mistaken for the proper name 
of an individual8#bc ,i do not profess  
to support this conjecture2 but it is   
certain that such mistakes may and do   
occur4 ,some critics have supposed that 
the ,athenians imagined ,,anastasis     
7,resurrection7 to be a new goddess1 in 
whose cause ,paul was preaching4 ,would 
it have been thought anything incredible
 if we had been told that the ancient   
,persians1 who had no idea of any but a 
monarchical government1 had supposed    
,aristocratia to be a queen of ,sparta8 
,but we need not confine ourselves to   
hypothetical cases2 it is positively    
stated that the ,hindoos at this day    
believe the honourable ,east ,india     
,company to be a venerable old lady of  

high dignity1 residing in this country4 
,the ,germans1 again1 of the present day
 derive their name from a similar       
mistake3 the first tribe of them who    
invaded ,gaul#bd assumed the honourable 
title of ,ger-man which signifies       
warriors1 7the words war and guerre1 as 
well as man1 which remains in our       
language unaltered1 are evidently       
derived from the ,teutonic17 and the    
,gauls applied this as a name to the    
whole race4  ,however1 ,i merely throw  
out these conjectures without by any    
means contending that more plausible    
ones might not be suggested4 ,but       
whatever supposition we adopt1 or       
whether we adopt any1 the objections to 
the commonly received accounts will     
remain in their full force1 and         
imperiously demand the attention of the 
candid sceptic4  ,i call upon those1    
therefore1 who profess themselves       
advocates of free inquiry--who disdain  
to be carried along with the stream of  
popular opinion1 and who will listen to 

no testimony that runs counter to       
experience1--to follow up their own     
principles fairly and consistently4 ,let
 the same mode of argument be adopted in
 all cases alike2 and then it can no    
longer be attributed to hostile         
prejudice1 but to enlarged and          
philosophical views4 ,if they have      
already rejected some histories1 on the 
ground of their being strange and       
marvellous1--of their relating facts1   
unprecedented1 and at variance with the 
established course of nature1--let them 
not give credit to another history which
 lies open to the very same             
objections1--the extraordinary and      
romantic tale we have been just         
considering4 ,if they have discredited  
the testimony of witnesses1 who are said
 at least to have been disinterested1   
and to have braved persecutions and     
death in support of their               
assertions1--can these philosophers     
consistently listen to and believe the  
testimony of those who avowedly get     

money by the tales they publish1 and who
 do not even pretend that they incur any
 serious risk in case of being detected 
in a falsehood8 ,if1 in other cases1    
they have refused to listen to an       
account which has passed through many   
intermediate hands before it reaches    
them1 and which is defended by those who
 have an interest in maintaining it2 let
 them consider through how many1 and    
what very suspicious hands1 this story  
has arrived to them1 without the        
possibility1 as ,i have shown1 of       
tracing it back to any decidedly        
authentic source1 after all2--to any    
better authority1 according to their own
 showing1 than that of an unnamed and   
unknown foreign correspondent2--and     
likewise how strong an interest1 in     
every way1 those who have hitherto      
imposed on them1 have in keeping up the 
imposture4 ,let them1 in short1 show    
themselves as ready to detect the       
cheats1 and despise the fables of       
politicians as of priests4  ,but if they

 are still wedded to the popular belief 
in this point1 let them be consistent   
enough to admit the same evidence in    
other cases which they yield to in this4
 ,if1 after all that has been said1 they
 cannot bring themselves to doubt of the
 existence of ,napoleon ,buonaparte1    
they must at least acknowledge that they
 do not apply to that question the same 
plan of reasoning which they have made  
use of in others2 and they are          
consequently bound in reason and in     
honesty to renounce it altogether4      
,,footnotes3  #c ,a report is spread1   
7says ,voltaire in one of his works17   
that there is1 in some country or other1
 a giant as big as a mountain2 and men  
presently fall to hot disputing         
concerning the precise length of his    
nose1 the breadth of his thumb1 and     
other particulars1 and anathematize each
 other for heterodoxy of belief         
concerning them4 ,in the midst of all1  
if some bold sceptic ventures to hint a 
doubt as to the existence of this giant1

 all are ready to join against him1 and 
tear him to pieces4 ,this looks almost  
like a prophetic allegory relating to   
the gigantic ,napoleon4  #d        1    
4 ,thucyd4 b4i4c4 #bj4  #e ,with what   
greediness are the miraculous accounts  
of travellers received1 their           
descriptions of sea and land monsters1  
their relations of wonderful adventures1
 strange men1 and uncouth               
manners6--,hume's ,essay on ,miracles1  
p4 #agi1 #abmo2 p4 #ahe1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4
 #aag1 #hvo1 #ahag4  ,n4,b4--,in order  
to give every possible facility of      
reference1 three editions of ,hume's    
,essays have been generally employed3 a 
#abmo1 ,london1 #agef1 and two #hvo     
editions4  #f ,suppose a fact to be     
transmitted through twenty persons2 the 
first communicating it to the second1   
the second to the third1 c41 and let the
 probability of each testimony be       
expressed by nine-tenths1 7that is1     
suppose that of ten reports made by each
 witness1 nine only are true17 then1 at 

every time the story passes from one    
witness to another1 the evidence is     
reduced to nine-tenths of what it was   
before4 ,thus1 after it has passed      
through the whole twenty1 the evidence  
will be found to be less than           
one-eighth4--,,la ,,place1 ,essai       
,philosophique sur les ,probabilits4    
,that is1 the chances for the fact thus 
attested being true1 will be1 according 
to this distinguished calculator1 less  
than one in eight4 ,very few of the     
common newspaper-stories1 however1      
relating to foreign countries1 could be 
traced1 if the matter were carefully    
investigated1 up to an actual           
eye-witness1 even through twenty        
intermediate witnesses2 and many of the 
steps of our ladder1 would1 ,i fear1    
prove but rotten2 few of the reporters  
would deserve to have one in ten fixed  
as the proportion of their false        
accounts4  #g ,i did not mention the    
difficulty of detecting a falsehood in  
any private or even public history1 at  

the time and place where it is said to  
happen2 much more where the scene is    
removed to ever so small a distance4444 
,but the matter never comes to any      
issue1 if trusted to the common method  
of altercation and debate and flying    
rumours4--,hume's ,essay on ,miracles1  
p4 #aie1 #abmo2 pp4 #bjj1 #bja1 #hvo1   
#agfg2 p4 #abg1 #hvo1 #ahag4  #h ,see   
the third ,postscript appended to this  
edition4  #i ,we entertain a suspicion  
concerning any matter of fact1 when the 
witnesses contradict each other2 when   
they are of a suspicious character2 when
 they have an interest in what they     
affirm4--,hume's ,essay on ,miracles1 p4
 #agb1 #abmo2 p4 #agf1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4  
#aac1 #hvo4 #ahag4  #aj ,that testimony 
itself derives all its force from       
experience1 seems very certain4444 ,the 
first author1 we believe1 who stated    
fairly the connexion between the        
evidence of testimony and the evidence  
of experience1 was ,,hume1 in his ,essay
 on ,miracles1 a work 444 abounding in  

maxims of great use in the conduct of   
life4--,edin4 ,review1 ,sept4 #ahad1 p4 
#cbh4  #aa ,suppose1 for instance1 that 
the fact which the testimony endeavours 
to establish partakes of the            
extraordinary and the marvellous2 in    
that case1 the evidence resulting from  
the testimony receives a diminution1    
greater or less in proportion as the    
fact is more or less unusual4--,hume's  
,essay on ,miracles1 p4 #agc1 #abmo2 p4 
#agf1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4 #aac1 #hvo1 #ahag4
  #ab ,the ultimate standard by which we
 determine all disputes that may arise  
is always derived from experience and   
observation4--,hume's ,essay on         
,miracles1 p4 #agb1 #abmo2 p4 #age1     
#hvo1 #agfg2 p4 #aab1 #hvo1 #ahag4  #ac 
4                               4       
,,pind4 ,olymp4 #a  #ad ,this doctrine1 
though hardly needing confirmation from 
authority1 is supported by that of      
,hume2 his eighth essay is1 throughout1 
an argument for the doctrine of         
,philosophical necessity1 drawn entirely

 from the general uniformity1 observable
 in the course of nature with respect to
 the principles of human conduct1 as    
well as those of the material universe2 
from which uniformity1 he observes1 it  
is that we are enabled in both cases1 to
 form our judgment by means of          
,experience3 and if1 says he1 we would  
explode any forgery in history1 we      
cannot make use of a more convincing    
argument1 than to prove that the actions
 ascribed to any person1 are directly   
contrary to the course of nature4444    
444 ,the ,veracity of ,quintus ,curtius 
is as suspicious when he describes the  
supernatural courage of ,alexander1 by  
which he was hurried on singly to attack
 multitudes1 as when he describes his   
supernatural force and activity1 by     
which he was able to resist them4 ,so   
readily and universally do we           
acknowledge a uniformity in human       
motives and actions1 as well as in the  
operations of body4--,eighth ,essay1 p4 
#aca1 #abmo2 p4 #he1 #hvo1 #ahag4       

,accordingly1 in the tenth essay1 his   
use of the term miracle1 after having   
called it a transgression of a law of   
nature1 plainly shows that he meant to  
include human nature3 no testimony1 says
 he1 is sufficient to establish a       
miracle1 unless the testimony be of such
 a nature that its falsehood would be   
more miraculous than the fact which it  
endeavours to establish4 ,the term      
prodigy also 7which he all along employs
 as synonymous with miracle7 is applied 
to testimony1 in the same manner1       
immediately after2 ,in the foregoing    
reasoning we have supposed 444 that the 
falsehood of that testimony would be a  
kind of prodigy4 ,now had he meant to   
confine the meaning of miracle1 and     
prodigy1 to a violation of the laws of  
matter1 the epithet miraculous1 applied 
even thus hypothetically1 to false      
testimony1 would be as unmeaning as the 
epithets green or square2 the only      
possible sense in which we can apply to 
it1 even in imagination1 the term       

miraculous1 is that of highly           
improbable1--contrary to those laws of  
nature which respect human conduct3 and 
in this sense he accordingly uses the   
word in the very next sentence3 ,when   
any one tells me that he saw a dead man 
restored to life1 ,i immediately        
consider with myself whether it be more 
probable that this person should either 
deceive or be deceived1 or that the fact
 which he relates should really have    
happened4 ,i weigh the one miracle      
against the other4--,hume's ,essay on   
,miracles1 pp4 #agf1 #agg1 #abmo2 p4    
#ahb1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4 #aae1 #hvo1 #ahag4
  ,see also a passage above quoted from 
the same essay1 where he speaks of the  
miraculous accounts of travellers2      
evidently using the word in this sense4 
,perhaps it was superfluous to cite     
authority for applying the term miracle 
to whatever is highly improbable2 but it
 is important to the students of ,hume1 
to be fully aware that he uses those two
 expressions as synonymous2 since       

otherwise they would mistake the meaning
 of that passage which he justly calls a
 general maxim worthy of your attention4
  #ae ,events may be so extraordinary   
that they can hardly be established by  
testimony4 ,we would not give credit to 
a man who would affirm that he saw a    
hundred dice thrown in the air1 and that
 they all fell on the same              
faces4--,edin4 ,review1 ,sept4 #ahad1 p4
 #cbg4  ,let it be observed1 that the   
instance here given is miraculous in no 
other sense but that of being highly    
improbable4  #af ,if the spirit of      
religion join itself to the love of     
wonder1 there is an end of common sense2
 and human testimony in these           
circumstances loses all pretensions to  
authority4--,hume's ,essay on ,miracles1
 p4 #agi1 #abmo2 p4 #ahe1 #hvo1 #agfg2  
p4 #aag1 #hvo1 #ahag4  #ag ,the supposed
 history from which the above extracts  
are given1 is published entire in the   
work called ,historic ,certainties4  #ah
 ,i desire any one to lay his hand upon 

his heart1 and after serious            
consideration declare whether he thinks 
that the falsehood of such a book1      
supported by such testimony1 would be   
more extraordinary and miraculous than  
all the miracles it relates4--,hume's   
,essay on ,miracles1 p4 #bjj1 #abmo2 p4 
#bjf1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4 #aca1 #hvo1 #ahag4
  ,let it be borne in mind that ,hume   
7as ,i have above remarked7 continually 
employs the term miracle and prodigy to 
signify anything that is highly         
improbable and extraordinary4  #ai ,the 
wise lend a very academic faith to every
 report which favours the passion of the
 reporter1 whether it magnifies his     
country1 his family1 or                 
himself4--,hume's ,essay on ,miracles1  
p4 #add1 #abmo2 p4 #bjj1 #hvo1 #agfg2 p4
 #abf1 #hvo1 #ahag4  #bj ,nothing can be
 more contrary than such a philosophy   
7the academic or sceptical7 to the      
supine indolence of the mind1 its rash  
arrogance1 its lofty pretensions1 and   
its superstitious credulity4--,fifth    

,essay1 p4 #fh1 #abmo2 p4 #da1 #hvo1    
#ahag4  #ba ,see ,hume's ,essay on      
,miracles1 pp4 #ahi1 #aia1 #aie1 #abmo2 
pp4 #aic1 #aig1 #bja1 #bjb1 #hvo1 #agfg2
 pp4 #abd1 #abe1 #abf1 #hvo1 #ahag4  #bb
 ,see ,edinburgh ,review for ,october1  
#ahdb1 p4 #afb4  #bc ,it is well know   
with how much learning and ingenuity the
 ,rationalists of the ,german school    
have laboured to throw discredit on the 
literal interpretation of the           
narratives1 both of the ,old and the    
,new ,testaments2 representing them as  
,,myths1 i4e41 fables allegorically     
describing some physical or moral       
phnomena--philosophical                 
principles--systems1 c4--under the      
figure of actions performed by certain  
ideal personages2 these allegories      
having been1 afterwards1 through the    
mistake of the vulgar1 believed as      
history4 ,thus1 the real historical     
existence of such a person as the       
supposed founder of the ,christian      
religion1 and the acts attributed to    

him1 are denied in the literal sense1   
and the whole of the evangelical history
 is explained on the mythical theory4   
,now it is a remarkable circumstance in 
reference to the point at present before
 us1 that an eminent authoress of this  
century has distinctly declared that    
,napoleon ,buonaparte was ,,not ,a      
,,man1 but a ,,system4  #bd ,germani    
vocabulum recens et nuper additum2      
quoniam qui primi ,rhenum transgressi   
,gallos expulerint1 ac nunc ,tungri1    
tunc ,germani vocati sint3 ita nationis 
nomen in nomen gentis evaluisse         
paullatim1 ut omnes1 primum a victore ob
 metum1 mox a seipsis invento nomine1   
,germani vocarentur4--,tacitus1 de ,mor4
 ,germ4         99       99       99    
99       99     ,,postscript ,,to ,,the 
,,third ,,edition4   ,it may seem       
arrogant for an obscure and nameless    
individual to claim the glory of having 
put to death the most formidable of all 
recorded heroes4 ,but a shadowy champion
 may be overthrown by a shadowy         

antagonist4 ,many a terrific spectre has
 been laid by the beams of a halfpenny  
candle4 ,and if ,i have succeeded in    
making out1 in the foregoing pages1 a   
probable case of suspicion1 it must1 ,i 
think1 be admitted1 that there is some  
ground for my present boast1 of having  
killed ,napoleon ,buonaparte4  ,let but 
the circumstances of the case be        
considered4 ,this mighty ,emperor1 who  
had been so long the bugbear of the     
civilized world1 after having obtained  
successes and undergone reverses1 such  
as never befel any 7other at least7 real
 potentate1 was at length sentenced to  
confinement in the remote island of ,st4
 ,helena3 a measure which many persons  
wondered at1 and many objected to1 on   
various grounds2 not unreasonably1      
supposing the illustrious exile to be a 
real person2 but on the supposition of  
his being only a man of straw1 the      
situation was exceedingly favourable for
 keeping him out of the way of          
impertinent curiosity1 when not wanted1 

and for making him the foundation of any
 new plots that there might be occasion 
to conjure up4  ,about this juncture it 
was that the public attention was first 
invited1 by these pages1 to the question
 as to the real existence of ,napoleon  
,buonaparte4 ,they excited1 it may be   
fairly supposed1 along with much        
surprise and much censure1 some degree  
of doubt1 and probably of consequent    
inquiry4 ,no fresh evidence1 as far as  
,i can learn1 of the truth of the       
disputed points1 was brought forward to 
dispel these doubts4 ,we heard1 however1
 of the most jealous precautions being  
used to prevent any intercourse between 
the formidable prisoner1 and any        
stranger who1 from motives of curiosity1
 might wish to visit him4 ,the man in   
the iron mask could hardly have been    
more rigorously secluded3 and we also   
heard various contradictory reports of  
conversations between him and the few   
who were allowed access to him2 the     
falsehood and inconsistency of most of  

these reports being proved in           
contemporary publications4  ,at length1 
just about the time when the public     
scepticism respecting this extraordinary
 personage might be supposed to have    
risen to an alarming height1 it was     
announced to us that he was dead6 ,a    
stop was thus put1 most opportunely1 to 
all troublesome inquiries4 ,i do not    
undertake to deny that such a person did
 live and die4 ,that he was1 and that he
 did1 everything that is reported1 we   
cannot believe1 unless we consent to    
admit contradictory statements2 but many
 of the events reported1 however        
marvellous1 are certainly not1 when     
taken separately1 physically impossible4
 ,but ,i would only entreat the candid  
reader to reflect what might naturally  
be expected1 on the supposition of the  
surmises contained in the present work  
being well founded4 ,supposing the whole
 of the tale ,i have been considering to
 have been a fabrication1 what would be 
the natural result of such attempt to   

excite inquiry into its truth8          
,evidently the shortest and most        
effectual mode of avoiding detection1   
would be to kill the phantom1 and so get
 rid of him at once4 ,a ready and       
decisive answer would thus be provided  
to any one in whom the foregoing        
arguments might have excited suspicions3
 ,sir1 there can be no doubt that such a
 person existed1 and performed what is  
related of him2 and if you will just    
take a voyage to ,st4 ,helena1 you may  
see with your own eyes1--not him1       
indeed1 for he is no longer living1--but
 his tomb3 and what evidence would you  
have that is more decisive8  ,so much   
for his ,death3 as for his ,life1--it is
 just published by an eminent writer3   
besides which1 the shops will supply us 
with abundance of busts and prints of   
this great man2 all striking            
likenesses--of one another4 ,the most   
incredulous must be satisfied with this6
 ,stat magni ,,nominis umbra6  ,,konx   
,,ompax4     ,,postscript ,,to ,,the    

,,seventh ,,edition4   ,since the       
publication of the ,sixth ,edition of   
this work1 the ,french nation1 and the  
world at large1 have obtained an        
additional evidence1 to which ,i hope   
they will attach as much weight as it   
deserves1 of the reality of the         
wonderful history ,i have been treating 
of4 ,the ,great ,nation1 among the many 
indications lately given of an heroic   
zeal like what ,homer attributes to his 
,argive warriors1      1 have formed and
 executed the design of bringing home   
for honourable interment the remains of 
their illustrious ,chief4  ,how many    
persons have actually inspected these   
relics1 ,i have not ascertained2 but    
that a real coffin1 containing real     
bones1 was brought from ,st4 ,helena to 
,france1 ,i see no reason to disbelieve4
  ,whether future visitors to ,st4      
,helena will be shown merely the        
identical place in which ,buonaparte was
 7said to have been7 interred1 or       
whether another set of real bones will  

be exhibited in that island1 we have yet
 to learn4  ,this latter supposition is 
not very improbable4 ,it was something  
of a credit to the island1 an attraction
 to strangers1 and a source of profit to
 some of the inhabitants1 to possess so 
remarkable a relic2 and this glory and  
advantage they must naturally wish to   
retain4 ,if so1 there seems no reason   
why they should not have a ,buonaparte  
of their own2 for there is1 ,i believe1 
no doubt that there are1 or were1       
several ,museums in ,england1 which1    
among other curiosities1 boasted1 each1 
of a genuine skull of ,oliver ,cromwell4
  ,perhaps1 therefore1 we shall hear of 
several well authenticated skulls of    
,buonaparte also1 in the collections of 
different virtuosos1 all of whom        
7especially those in whose own crania   
the organ of wonder is the most largely 
developed7 will doubtless derive equal  
satisfaction from the relics they       
respectively possess4     ,,postscript  
,,to ,,the ,,ninth ,,edition4   ,the    

,public has been of late much interested
 and not a little bewildered1 by the    
accounts of many strange events1 said to
 have recently taken place in ,france   
and other parts of the ,continent4 ,are 
these accounts of such a character as to
 allay1 or to strengthen and increase1  
such doubts as have been suggested in   
the foregoing pages8  ,we are told that 
there is now a ,napoleon ,buonaparte at 
the head of the government of ,france4  
,it is not1 indeed1 asserted that he is 
the very original ,napoleon ,buonaparte 
himself4 ,the death of that personage1  
and the transportation of his genuine   
bones to ,france1 had been too widely   
proclaimed to allow of his reappearance 
in his own proper person4 ,but uno      
avulso1 non deficit alter4 ,like the    
,thibetian worshippers of the ,dalai    
,lama1 7who never dies2 only his soul   
transmigrates into a fresh body71 the   
,french are so resolved1 we are told1 to
 be under a ,buonaparte--whether that be
 7see note to p4 #ef7 a man or a        

system--that they have found1 it seems1 
a kind of new incarnation of this their 
,grand ,lama1 in a person said to be the
 nephew of the original one4  ,and when1
 on hearing that this personage now     
fills the high office of ,president of  
the ,french ,republic1 we inquire 7very 
naturally7 how he came there1 we are    
informed that1 several years ago1 he    
invaded ,france in an ,english vessel1  
7the ,english--as was observed in p4    
#eb--;having always been suspected of   
keeping ,buonaparte ready1 like the     
winds in a ,lapland witch's bag1 to be  
let out on occasion17 at the head of a  
force1 not1 of six hundred men1 like his
 supposed uncle in his expedition from  
,elba1 but of fifty-five1767 with which 
he landed at ,boulogne1 proclaimed      
himself emperor1 and was joined by no   
less than one man6 ,he was accordingly1 
we are told1 arrested1 brought to trial1
 and sentenced to imprisonment2 but     
having1 some years after1 escaped from  
prison1 and taken refuge in ,england1   

7,england again67 he thence returned to 
,france3 ,,and ,,so the ,french nation  
placed him at the head of the           
government6  ,all this will doubtless be
 received as a very probable tale by    
those who have given full credit to all 
the stories ,i have alluded to in the   
foregoing pages4     ,,postscript ,,to  
,,the ,,eleventh ,,edition4   ,when any 
dramatic piece takes--as the phrase     
is--with the ,public1 it will usually be
 represented again and again with       
still-continued applause2 and sometimes 
imitations of it will be produced2 so   
that the same drama in substance will1  
with occasional slight variations in the
 plot1 and changes of names1 long keep  
possession of the stage4  ,something    
like this has taken place with respect  
to that curious tragi-comedy--the scene 
of it laid in ,france--which has engaged
 the attention of the ,british public   
for about sixty years2 during which it  
has been exhibited to crowded           
houses--viz41 coffee-houses1            

reading-rooms1 c41 with unabated        
interest4  ,the outline of this drama1  
or series of dramas1 may be thus        
sketched3  ,dramatis ,person4  ,a4 ,a   
,king or other ,sovereign4  ,b4 ,his    
,queen4  ,c4 ,the ,heir apparent4  ,d4  
,e4 ,f4 ,his ,ministers4  ,g4 ,h4 ,i4   
,j4 ,k4 ,demagogues4  ,l4 ,a popular    
leader of superior ingenuity1 who       
becomes ultimately supreme ruler under  
the title of ,dictator1 ,consul1        
,emperor1 ,king1 ,president1 or some    
other4  ,soldiers1 ,senators1           
,executioners1 and other functionaries1 
,citizens1 ,fishwomen1 c4  ,scene1      
,paris4  7#a47 ,the first ,act of one of
 these dramas represents a monarchy1    
somewhat troubled by murmurs of         
disaffection1 suspicions of conspiracy1 
c4  7#b47 ,second ,act1 a rebellion2 in 
which ultimately the government is      
overthrown4  7#c47 ,act the third1 a    
provisional government established1 on  
principles of liberty1 equality1        
fraternity1 c4  7#d47 ,act the fourth1  

struggles of various parties for power1 
carried on with sundry intrigues1 and   
sanguinary conflicts4  7#e47 ,act the   
fifth1 the re-establishment of some form
 of absolute monarchy4  ,and from this  
point we start afresh1 and begin the    
same business over again1 with sundry   
fresh interludes4  ,all this is highly  
amusing to the ,english ,public to hear 
and read of2 but ,i doubt whether our   
countrymen would like to be actual      
performers in such a drama4  ,whether   
the ,french really are so1 or whether   
they are mystifying us in the accounts  
they send over1 ,i will not presume to  
decide4 ,but if the former supposition  
be the true one1--if they have been so  
long really acting over and over again  
in their own persons such a drama1 it   
must be allowed that they deserve to be 
characterized as they have been in the  
description given of certain ,european  
nations3 ,an ,englishman1 it has been   
said1 is never happy but when he is     
miserable2 a ,scotchman is never at home

 but when he is abroad2 an ,irishman is 
never at peace but when he is fighting2 
a ,spaniard is never at liberty but when
 he is enslaved2 and a ,frenchman is    
never settled but when he is engaged in 
a revolution4     ,,postscript ,,to     
,,the ,,twelfth ,,edition4   ,time says 
the proverb1 rings ,truth to light4 ,but
 the process is gradual and slow4 ,the  
debt is paid1 as it were1 by            
instalments4 ,it is only bit by bit1 and
 at considerable intervals1 that ,truth 
comes forth as the morning twilight to  
dispel the mists of fiction4  ,it is    
above forty years that men have been    
debating the question3--,who were the   
parties that burned the city of         
,moscow8--without ever thinking of the  
preliminary question1 whether it ever   
was burnt at all4 ,and now at length we 
learn that it never was4  ,the following
 extract from a ,new ,orleans paper     
contains the information obtained by an 
,american traveller--one of that great  
nation whose accuracy as to facts is so 

well known--who visited the spot4       
,,incidents ,,of ,,travel--,,city ,,of  
,,moscow4    ,senator ,douglas is said  
to have made the discovery1 while       
travelling in ,russia1 that the city of 
,moscow was never burned6   ,the        
following statement of the matter is    
from the ,muscatine   7,iowa7 ,inquirer3
    ,coming on the boat1 a few days ago1
 we happened to fall in   company with  
,senator ,douglas1 who came on board at 
,quincy1 on his   way to ,warsaw4 ,in   
the course of a very interesting account
 of his   travels in ,russia1 much of   
which has been published by             
letter-writers1 he stated a fact which  
has never yet been   published1 but     
which startlingly contradicts the       
historical   relation of one of the most
 extraordinary events that ever fell    
to the lot of history to record4 ,for   
this reason the ,judge said   he felt a 
delicacy in making the assertion1 that  
the city of   ,moscow was never burned6 
,he said1 that previous to his arrival  

at ,moscow1 he had several   disputes   
with his guide as to the burning of the 
city1 the guide   declaring that it     
never occurred1 and seeming to be       
nettled at   ,mr4 ,douglas's persistency
 in his opinion2 but1 on examining the  
fire-marks around the city1 and the city
 itself1 he became   satisfied that the 
guide was correct4    ,the statement    
goes on to set forth that the antiquity 
of the   architectural                  
city--particularly of its 'six hundred  
first-class   churches1' stretching     
through ante-,napoleonic ages to ,pagan 
times1 and showing the handiwork of     
different nations of                    
,history--demonstrates that the city    
never was burned down 7or   up74    ,the
 ,inquirer adds3    ,the ,kremlin is a  
space of several hundred acres1 in the  
heart of   the city1 in the shape of a  
flat iron1 and is enclosed1 by a wall   
of sixty feet high4 ,within this        
enclosure is the most magnificent       
palace in ,europe1 recently built1 but  

constructed over an ancient   palace1   
which remains1 thus enclosed1 whole and 
perfect1 with all   its windows1 c4     
,near the ,kremlin1 surrounded by a     
wall1 is a ,chinese town1   appearing to
 be several hundred years old1 still    
occupied by   descendants of the        
original settlers4    ,the circumstances
 which gave rise to the errors          
concerning the   burning of ,moscow1    
were these3--,it is a city of four      
hundred and   fifty thousand            
inhabitants1 in circular form1 occupying
 a large   space1 five miles across4    
,there the winters are six months long1 
and the custom was1 and still is1 to lay
 up supplies of   provisions and wood to
 last six months of severe cold weather4
 ,to   prevent these gigantic supplies  
from encumbering the heart of the       
city1 and yet render them as convenient 
as practicable to every   locality1 a   
row of wood houses was constructed to   
circle   completely round the city1 and 
outside of these was a row of           

granaries1 and in these were deposited  
the whole of the supplies4   ,napoleon  
had entered the city with his army1 and 
was himself   occupying the palace of   
the ,kremlin1 when1 one night1 by order 
of   the ,russian governor1 every wood  
house and every granary   simultaneously
 burst into a blaze4 ,all efforts to    
extinguish them   were vain1 and        
,napoleon found himself compelled to    
march his army   through the fire4      
,retiring to an eminence he saw the     
whole city   enveloped in vast sheets of
 flame1 and clouds of smoke1 and        
apparently all on fire4 ,and far as he  
was concerned it might as   well have   
been1 for though houses enough were left
 to supply   every soldier with a room1 
yet without provisions or fuel1 and a   
,russian army to cut off supplies1 he   
and his army could not   subsist there4 
,during the fire some houses were       
probably burnt1   but the city was not4 
,in the ,kremlin a magazine blew up1    
cracking   the church of ,ivan more than

 a hundred feet up1 but setting         
nothing on fire4    ,mr4 ,douglas saw   
the fire-marks around the city1 where   
wood   houses and granaries for winter  
supplies now stand as of old2 but       
there appears no marks of conflagration 
within the city4  ,any wary sceptic1    
indeed1 might have found much ground for
 doubt in the very accounts themselves  
that were given of the conflagration4   
,for1 the ,russians have always denied  
that they burned it2 and the ,french    
equally disclaimed the act4 ,each of the
 two parties between whom the accusation
 lay1 strenuously denied it4 ,and it    
must be acknowledged that each had very 
strong presumptions of innocence to     
urge4 ,it was certainly most unlikely   
that the ,russians should themselves    
destroy their ancient and venerable     
capital2 and that1 too1 when they were  
boasting of having just gained a great  
victory at ,borodino over an army which1
 therefore1 they might hope to defeat   
again1 and to drive out of their city4  

,and it was no less unlikely that the   
,french should burn down a city of which
 they had possession1 and which afforded
 shelter and refreshment to their       
troops4 ,this would have been one of the
 most improbable circumstances of that  
most improbable 7supposed7 campaign4 ,to
 add to the marvel1 we are told that the
 ,french army nevertheless waited for   
five weeks1 without any object1 amid the
 ashes of this destroyed city1 just at  
the approach1 of winter1 and as if on   
purpose to be overtaken and destroyed by
 snows and frost6  ,however1 all the    
difficulties of the question whether any
 of these things took place at all1 were
 by most persons overlooked1 because the
 question itself never occurred to them1
 in their eagerness to decide who it was
 that burned the city4 ,and at length it
 comes out that the answer is1 ,,nobody6
   ,,the ,,end4     ,,postscript4       
,with respect to the foregoing          
arguments1 it has been asserted 7though 
without even any attempt at proof7 that 

they go to prove that the               
,bible-narratives contain nothing more  
miraculous than the received accounts of
 ,napoleon ,buonapart4 ,and this is     
indeed true1 if we use the word         
miraculous in the very unusual sense in 
which ,hume 7as is pointed out in the   
foregoing pages7 has employed it2 to    
signify simply improbable2 an abuse of  
language on which his argument mainly   
depends4  ,it is indeed shown1 that     
there are at least as many and as great 
improbabilities in the history of       
,buonapart as in any of the             
,scripture-narratives2 and that as      
plausible objections1--if not more      
so1--may be brought against the one     
history as the other4  ,but taking words
 in their ordinary1 established sense1  
the assertion is manifestly the opposite
 of the truth4 ,for1 any one who        
does1--in spite of all the              
improbabilities1--believe the truth of  
both histories1 is1 evidently1 a        
believer in miracles2 since he believes 

two narratives1 one of which is not     
miraculous1 while the other is4 ,the    
history of ,buonapart contains--though  
much that is very improbable--nothing   
that is to be called1 according to the  
established use of language1 miraculous4
 ,and the ,scriptures contain1 as an    
essential part of their narrative1      
,miracles1 properly so called4  ,to talk
 of believing the ,bible1 all except the
 ,miracles1 would be like professing to 
believe the accounts of ,buonapart1     
except only his commanding armies1 and  
having been at ,elba and at ,saint      
,helena4         99       99       99   
99       99  ,one cannot doubt that in  
the course of the forty years that this 
little ,work has been before the        
,public1 some real1 valid refutation of 
the argument would have been adduced1 if
 any such could have been devised4      
#ahfj4         99       99       99     
99       99