THE HISTORY
OF NAPOLEON
BUONAPARTE
BY
JOHN GIBSON LOCKHART
LONDON & TORONTO J.M. DENT & SONS LTD.
NEW YORK E.P. DUTTON & CO
First issue of this edition: February 1906
Reprinted: April 1906; May 1907;
July 1909; November 1910;
November 1912; March 1915
INTRODUCTION
[Lockhart, 1794-1854]
"Nations yet to come will look back upon his history as to some grandand supernatural romance. The fiery energy of his youthful career, andthe magnificent progress of his irresistible ambition, have invested hischaracter with the mysterious grandeur of some heavenly appearance; andwhen all the lesser tumults and lesser men of our age shall have passedaway into the darkness of oblivion, history will still inscribe onemighty era with the majestic name of Napoleon."
These enthusiastic words, too, are Lockhart's, though they are not fromthis history, but from some "Remarks on the Periodical Criticism ofEngland," which he published in Blackwood's Magazine. They serve, ifthey are taken in conjunction with his book, to mark his position in thelong list of the historians, biographers and critics who have written inEnglish, and from an English or a British point of view, upon "Napoleonthe Great." Lockhart, that is to say, was neither of the idolaters, likeHazlitt, nor of the decriers and blasphemers.
One recalls at once what he said of "the lofty impartiality" with whichSir Walter Scott had written of Napoleon before him, and with which heappears to have faced his lesser task. As a biography, as a writing ofhistory, as an example of historic style, Lockhart's comparativelymodest essay must be called a better performance than Scott's. But "thereal Napoleon" has not yet been painted.
Lord Rosebery, in his book on Napoleon: the Last Phase, asks if therewill ever be an adequate portrait? The life is yet to be written thatshall profit by all the new material that has come to light since Scottwrote his nine volumes[Pg x] in 1827, and Lockhart published his in 1829. ButLockhart's book has still the value of one written by a genuine man ofletters, who was a born biographer, and one written while theworld-commotion of Napoleon was a matter of personal report. It istinged by some of the contemporary illusions, no doubt; but it isclearer in its record than Scott's, and while it is less picturesque, itis more direct.
His comparative brevity is a gain, since he has to tell how, in briefspace, "the lean, hungry conqueror swells," as Lord Rosebery says, "intothe sovereign, and then into the sovereign of sovereigns."
In view of the influence of the one book upon the other, and the onewriter upon the other, it is worth note that Lockhart had a fit ofenthusiasm over Scott's Napoleon when it first appeared, or ratherwhen he first read the first six volumes of the work, before they were"out," in 1827. He thought Scott would make as great a