asks for documentary materials and for
moral support, ending with ardent assurances of devotion from his
family, his mother, and himself. But there is a ring of false coin in
many of its words and sentences. The "infamy" of those who betrayed
Corsica was the infamy of his own father; the "devotion" of the
Buonaparte family had been to the French interest, in order to secure
free education, with support for their children, in France. The
"enthusiasm" of Napoleon was a cold, unsentimental determination to
push their fortunes, which, with opposite principles, would have been
honorable enough. In later years Lucien said that he had made two
copies of the history. It was probably one of these which has been
preserved. Whether or not Paoli read the book does not appear. Be that
as it may, his reply to Buonaparte's letter, written some months
later, was not calculated to encourage the would-be historian. Without
absolutely refusing the documents asked for by the aspiring writer, he
explained that he had no time to search for them, and that, besides,
Corsican history was only important in any sense by reason of the men
who had made it, not by reason of its achievements. Among other bits
of fatherly counsel was this: "You are too young to write history.
Make ready for such an enterprise slowly. Patiently collect your
anecdotes and facts. Accept the opinions of other writers with
reserve." As if to soften the severity of his advice, there follows a
strain of modest self-depreciation: "Would that others had known less
of me and I more of myself. _Probe diu vivimus_; may our descendants
so live that they shall speak of me merely as one who had good
intentions."

Buonaparte's last shift in the treatment of his book was most
undignified and petty. With the unprincipled resentment of despair, in
want of money, not of advice, he entirely remodeled it for the third
time, its chapters being now put as fragmentary traditions into the
mouth of a Corsican mountaineer. In this form it was dedicated to
Necker, the famous Swiss, who as French minister of finance was vainly
struggling with the problem of how to distribute taxation equally, and
to collect from the privileged classes their share. A copy was first
sent to a former teacher for criticism. His judgment was extremely
severe both as to expression and style. In particular, attention was
called to the disadvantage of indulging in so much rhetoric for the
benefit of an overworked public