Chapter II: Therapeutics (1)

IS it possible to accelerate the recovery of the cultivated classes from the present derangement of their nervous system?

I seriously believe it to be so, and for that reason alone I undertook this work.

No one, I hope, will think me childish enough to imagine that I can bring degenerates to reason by incontrovertibly and convincingly demonstrating to them the derangement of their minds. He whose profession brings him into frequent contact with the insane knows the utter hopelessness of attempting by persuasion or argument to bring them to a recognition of the unreality and morbidness of their delusions. The only result attained is that they regard the physician either as an enemy and persecutor, and fiercely hate him, or as a blockhead devoid of reason on whom they vent their derision.

It is equally vain to preach to fanatics of the insane tendencies of fashions in art and literature, on their enthusiasm for error and foolishness. These fanatics, without being actually momentarily diseased, are yet on the border-line of insanity. They do not and cannot believe it. For the works, the madness of which is at the first glance apparent to every rational being, actually afford them feelings of pleasure. These works are an expression of their own mental derangement, and of the perversion of their own instincts. In the perusal, or contemplation of these productions, the half-witted fall into a state of excitation which they hold to be æsthetic, but which is really sensual; and this sensation is so genuine and immediate, they are so sure of it, that they can feel only annoyance at or pity for him who would make it plain to them that these works evoke no pleasure, but only disgust and contempt. To an habitual drinker it is possible to prove that absinthe is pernicious, but it is absolutely impossible to convince him that it has a disagreeable taste. To him, indeed, it tastes seductively delicious. It is in vain that the psychiatrical critic assures the patient that this book, that picture, are horrible deliriums; the invalid will in good faith reply: ‘Deliriums? That may be. But abhorrent? That I can never believe. I know better. They move me deeply and delightfully, and nothing you can say can prevent their doing so!’ Those whose minds are more unhinged go still further, and say bluntly: ‘We feel in all our nerves the beauty of these works. You do not; so much the worse for you. Instead of perceiving that you are a barbarian, devoid of intelligence, and an obtuse Philistine, you wish to argue us out of our most positive sensations. The only delirious person here is yourself.’

The history of civilization teaches to satiety, that delusions awaken ardent enthusiasm, and during hundreds or thousands of years obtain an invincible mastery of the thought and feeling of millions, because they vouchsafe a satisfaction, unhealthy though it be, to an existing instinct. Against that which procures feelings of pleasure for man, the objections of reason are unavailing.

Those degenerates, whose mental derangement is too deep-seated, must be abandoned to their inexorable fate. They are past cure or amelioration. They will rave for a season, and then perish. This book is obviously not written for them. It is, however, possible to reduce the disease of the age ‘to its anatomical necessity’ (to use the excellent expression of German medical science), and to this end every effort must be directed. For in addition to those whose organic constitution irrevocably condemns them to such a fate, the present degenerate tendencies are pursued by many who are only victims to fashion and certain cunning impostures, and these misguided ones we may hope to lead back to right paths. If, on the other hand, they were to be passively abandoned to the influences of graphomaniacal fools and their imbecile or unscrupulous bodyguard of critics, the inevitable result of such a neglect of duty would be a much more rapid and violent outspread of the mental contagion, and civilized humanity would with much greater difficulty, and much more slowly, recover from the disease of the age than it might under a strong and resolute combat with the evil.

Those persons, on whose minds it is above all necessary to impress the fact that the current tendencies are a result of mental degeneration and hysteria, are the slightly affected and the healthy, who allow themselves to be deluded by cunningly-devised catch-words, or who, through heedless curiosity, flock where they see a crowd. Certain critics have thought to intimidate me into speechlessness by saying: ‘If the indications cited are a proof of degeneration and mental disease, then is art and poetry in general the work of fools and degenerates, even such as has, without reservation, been hitherto admired, for in this likewise there are to be met the marks of degeneration.’ To which I reply: If scientific criticism, which tests works of art according to the principles of psychiatry and psychology, should result in showing that all artistic activity is diseased, that would still prove nothing against the correctness of my critical method. It would only be the acquisition of fresh knowledge. It would, doubtless, destroy a charming delusion, and prove painful to many; but science ought not to be checked by the consideration that its results annihilate agreeable errors, and frighten the easy-going out of comfortable habits of thought. Faith, again, is another sovereign besides art; it has rendered quite other services to humanity at a certain stage of evolution, has otherwise consoled and raised it, given it other ideals, and advanced it morally in a different way from even the greatest geniuses of art. Science, nevertheless, has not hesitated to pronounce faith a subjective error of man, and would, therefore, suffer far fewer scruples in characterizing art as something morbid if facts should convince it that such was the case. Moreover, not all that is morbid is necessarily ugly and pernicious. The expectoration of a sufferer from lung disease is quite as much a diseased secretion as the pearl. Is the pearl made more ugly or the expectoration more beautiful by the fact that they have the same origin? The toxine of sausage-meat is the excretion of a bacterium, that of ethyl-alcohol the secretion from a fungus. Is the similarity of genesis the condition of equal value for enjoyment in a poisoned sausage and a glass of old Rhine wine? It would prove nothing in regard to Tolstoi’s _Kreutzer Sonata_ or Ibsen’s _Rosmersholm_ if it were of necessity admitted that Goethe’s _Werther_ suffers from irrational eroticism, and that the _Divina Commedia_ and _Faust_ are symbolic poems. The whole objection, indeed, proceeds from a non-recognition of the simplest biological facts. The difference between disease and health is not one of kind, but of quantity. There is only one kind of vital activity of the cells and of the cell-systems or organs. It is the same in disease and in health. It is sometimes accelerated, and sometimes retarded; and when this deviation from the rule is detrimental to the ends of the whole organism, we call it disease. As it is here a question of more or less, it is impossible to define their limits sharply. Extreme cases are naturally easily recognised. But who shall determine with accuracy the exact point at which deviation from the normal, _i.e._, from health, begins? The insane brain performs its functions according to precisely the same laws as the rational brain, but it obeys these laws either imperfectly or excessively. In every human being there exists the tendency to interpret sense-impressions falsely. It is diseased only when exhibited in extraordinary strength. The traveller in a railway carriage has an illusory perception of the landscape flying by him while he is sitting still. The sufferer from the delusion of persecutions imagines that someone is wafting him evil odours, or hurling currents of electricity at him. Both of these ideas rest on sense-illusions. Are both for that reason marks of insanity? The traveller and the paranoist commit the same error of thought, and, nevertheless, the former is perfectly sane, and the latter deranged in mind. It may therefore with perfect security be affirmed that certain peculiarities--such as intense emotionalism, the tendency to symbolism, the predominance of imagination--are to be met with in all true artists. That all should be degenerates is very far from being a necessary consequence of this. It is only the exaggeration of these peculiarities which constitutes a disease. The sole conclusion justified by their regular appearance in artists would be that art, without being properly a disease of the human mind, is yet an incipient, slight deviation from perfect health; and I should raise no objection to this conclusion, the less so because it in no way helps the case of real degenerates and their distinctly diseased works. But it is not enough to prove that mysticism, ego-mania, and the pessimism of realism are forms of mental derangement. All the seductive masks must be torn from these tendencies, and their real aspect be shown in its grinning nakedness.

In opposition to healthy art, which they deride as musty and antiquated, they pretend to represent youth. An ill-advised criticism has actually been caught by their lime, and emphasizes their youth with constant irony. What clumsiness! As if any effort in the world could deprive of its charm the word ‘young,’ this essential notion of all that is blooming and fresh, this note of the dawn and the spring, and transform it into a term of reproach and insult! The truth is, however, that degenerates are not only not young, but that they are weirdly senile. Senile is their splenetic calumniation of the world and life; senile are their babblings, drivellings, ravings and divagations; senile their impotent appetites, and their cravings for all the stimulants of exhaustion. To be young is to hope; to be young is to love simply and naturally; to be young is to rejoice in one’s own health and strength, and in that of all human beings, and of the birds of the air and the beetles in the grass; and of these qualities there is not one to be met with among the youth-simulating, decayed degenerates.

They have the name of liberty on their lips when they proclaim as their god their corrupt self, and call it progress when they extol crime, deny morality, raise altars to instinct, scoff at science, and hold up loafing æstheticism as the sole aim of life. But their invocation of liberty is shameless blasphemy. How can there be a question of liberty when instinct is to be almighty? Let us remember Count Muffat in Zola’s _Nana_ (p. 491): ‘At other times he was a dog. She threw her scented handkerchief to the end of the room for him, and he had to run on all fours to pick it up with his teeth. “Fetch it, Cæsar!... Look out; I’ll give it to you if you’re lazy!... Very good, Cæsar! mind! nicely!... Sit up!” And as for him, he loved his abasement, revelled in the joy of being a brute. He wanted to sink still lower; he cried: “Hit harder.... Bow wow! I am mad; hit me then!”’ That is the liberty of one who is ‘emancipated’ in the sense of the degenerates! He may be a dog, if his crazed instinct commands him to be a dog! And if the ‘emancipated’ one is named Ravachol, and his instinct commands him to perpetrate the crime of blowing up a house with dynamite, the peaceable citizen sleeping in this house is free to fly into the air, and fall again to the ground in a bloody rain of shreds of flesh and splinters of bone. Progress is possible only by the growth of knowledge; but this is the task of consciousness and judgment, not of instinct. The march of progress is characterized by the expansion of consciousness and the contraction of the unconscious; the strengthening of will and the weakening of impulsions; the increase of self-responsibility and the repression of reckless egoism. He who makes instinct man’s master does not wish for liberty, but for the most infamous and abject slavery, viz., enslavement of the judgment of the individual by his most insensate and self-destructive appetites; enslavement of the inflamed man by the craziest whims of a prostitute; enslavement of the people by a few stronger and more violent personalities. And he who places pleasure above discipline, and impulse above self-restraint, wishes not for progress, but for retrogression to the most primitive animality.

Retrogression, relapse--this is in general the ideal of this band who dare to speak of liberty and progress. They wish to be the future. That is one of their chief pretensions. That is one of the means by which they catch the largest number of simpletons. We have, however, seen in all individual cases that it is not the future but the most forgotten, far-away past. Degenerates lisp and stammer, instead of speaking. They utter monosyllabic cries, instead of constructing grammatically and syntactically articulated sentences. They draw and paint like children, who dirty tables and walls with mischievous hands. They compose music like that of the yellow natives of East Asia. They confound all the arts, and lead them back to the primitive forms they had before evolution differentiated them. Every one of their qualities is atavistic, and we know, moreover, that atavism is one of the most constant marks of degeneracy. Lombroso has convincingly demonstrated that many peculiarities of the born criminals described by him are also atavisms. Over-hasty critics believed that they had discovered a very subtle objection when, with a smile of self-satisfaction, they objected: ‘You assert that criminal instinct is at once degeneracy and atavism. These two dicta are mutually exclusive. Degeneracy is a pathological state; the most convincing proof of this is, that the degenerate type does not propagate itself, but becomes extinct. Atavism is a return to an earlier state, which cannot have been diseased, because the men who existed under those conditions have developed themselves and progressed. Return to a healthy, albeit remote, state cannot possibly be disease.’ All this verbiage has its source in the stubborn superstition which sees in disease a state differing essentially from that of health. This is a good example of the confusion which a word is capable of producing in muddled or ignorant brains. As a matter of fact there exists no activity and no state of the living organism which can in itself be designated as ‘health’ or ‘disease.’ But they become these in respect of the circumstances and purposes of the organism. According to the time of its appearance, one and the same state may very well be at one time disease and at another health. In the human fœtus, at the sixth week, hare-lip is a regular and healthy phenomenon. In the newly-born child it is a malformation. In the first year of its life the child cannot walk. Why? Because its legs are too weak to support it? Decidedly not. The well-known experiments of Dr. L. Robinson on sixty new born infants have proved that they are able to hang by their hands from a stick for thirty seconds, a performance implying muscular strength quite as considerable, relatively to their respective ages, as is possessed by the adult. It is not from weakness that they are unable to walk, but because their nervous system has not yet learned so to regulate and combine the activity of the different groups of muscles, as to produce a purposive movement. Infants cannot yet ‘co-ordinate.’ Incapacity of co-ordination of muscular activity is called by medical science ataxy. Hence in infants this is the natural and healthy condition. But ataxy precisely is a serious disease when it appears in adults, as the chief symptom of inflammation of the spinal cord. The identity of the ataxy of spinal disease with healthy infantine ataxy is so complete, that Dr. S. Frenkel[480] was able to found upon it a treatment of spinal ataxy, which consisted, essentially, in teaching the patients anew, like children, to walk and stand. It is seen, then, that a state may be at the same time diseased and yet the mere return to what was primitively a perfectly healthy state of things; and it was with culpable frivolity that Lombroso was reproached with contradiction because he saw in criminal instincts at once degeneracy and atavism. The disease of degeneracy consists precisely in the fact that the degenerate organism has not the power to mount to the height of evolution already attained by the species, but stops on the way at an earlier or later point. The relapse of the degenerate may reach to the most stupendous depth. As, in reverting to the cleavage of the superior maxillary peculiar to insects with sextuple lips, he sinks somatically to the level of fishes, nay to that of the arthropoda, or, even further, to that of rhizopods not yet sexually differentiated; as by fistulæ of the neck he reverts to the branchiæ of the lowest fishes, the selacious; or by excess in the number of fingers (polydactylia) to the multiple-rayed fins of fishes, perhaps even to the bristles of worms; or, by hermaphrodism, to the asexuality of rhizopods--so in the most favourable case, as a higher degenerate, he renews intellectually the type of the primitive man of the most remote Stone Age; or, in the worst case, as an idiot, that of an animal far anterior to man.

This is the subject in regard to which it is our duty untiringly and by every means to enlighten the weak in judgment, and the inexperienced. The fine names appropriated to themselves by degenerates, their imitators, and their critical hirelings, are lies and deceit. They are not the future, but an immeasurably remote past. They are not progress, but the most appalling reaction. They are not liberty, but the most disgraceful slavery. They are not youth and the dawn, but the most exhausted senility, the starless winter night, the grave and corruption.

It is the sacred duty of all healthy and moral men to take part in the work of protecting and saving those who are not already too deeply diseased. Only by each individual doing his duty will it be possible to dam up the invading mental malady. It is not seemly simply to shrug the shoulders and smile contemptuously. While the easy-going console themselves by saying, ‘No rational being takes this idiocy seriously,’ madness and crime are doing their work and poisoning a whole generation.

Mystics, but especially ego-maniacs and filthy pseudo-realists, are enemies to society of the direst kind. Society must unconditionally defend itself against them. Whoever believes with me that society is the natural organic form of humanity, in which alone it can exist, prosper, and continue to develop itself to higher destinies; whoever looks upon civilization as a good, having value and deserving to be defended, must mercilessly crush under his thumb the anti-social vermin. To him who, with Nietzsche, is enthusiastic over the ‘freely-roving, lusting beast of prey,’ we cry, ‘Get you gone from civilization! Rove far from us! Be a lusting beast of prey in the desert! Satisfy yourself! Level your roads, build your huts, clothe and feed yourself as you can! Our streets and our houses are not built for you; our looms have no stuffs for you; our fields are not tilled for you. All our labour is performed by men who esteem each other, have consideration for each other, mutually aid each other, and know how to curb their selfishness for the general good. There is no place among us for the lusting beast of prey; and if you dare return to us, we will pitilessly beat you to death with clubs.’

And still more determined must the resistance be to the filth-loving herd of swine, the professional pornographists. These have no claim to the measure of pity which may still be extended to degenerates properly so called, as invalids; for they have freely chosen their vile trade, and prosecute it from cupidity, vanity, and hatred of labour. The systematic incitation to lasciviousness causes the gravest injury to the bodily and mental health of individuals, and a society composed of individuals sexually over-stimulated, knowing no longer any self-control, any discipline, any shame, marches to its certain ruin, because it is too worn out and flaccid to perform great tasks. The pornographist poisons the springs whence flows the life of future generations. No task of civilization has been so painfully laborious as the subjugation of lasciviousness. The pornographist would take from us the fruit of this, the hardest struggle of humanity. To him we must show no mercy.

The police cannot aid us. The public prosecutor and criminal judge are not the proper protectors of society against crime committed with pen and crayon. They infuse into their mode of proceeding too much consideration for interests not always, not necessarily, those of cultivated and moral men. The policeman is so often compelled to intervene in the service of a privileged class, of the insupportable arrogance of administrations, of the assumption of infallibility of ministers and other government officials of the most unworthy byzantism and of the most stupid superstition, that he does not dishonour the man on whose shoulder he lays his heavy hand. Hence it comes to this, that the pornographist must be branded with infamy. But the punitive sentence of a judge does not with certainty have this effect.

The condemnation of works trading on unchastity must emanate from men of whose freedom from prejudice and freedom of mind, intelligence and independence, no one entertains a doubt. The word of such men would be of great weight among the people. There already exists an ‘Association of Men for the Suppression of Immorality.’ Unfortunately it allows itself to be guided not only by solicitude for the moral health and purity of the multitude, and especially of the young but by considerations which to the majority of the people seem to be prejudices. The association pursues disbelief almost more than immorality. An outspoken word against revelation or the Church inspires this association with as much horror as an act of obscenity. To this narrow-minded confessionalism is it due that its work is less rich in blessing than it might be. But in spite of this, we can take this ‘Association of Men’ as a pattern. Let us do what it does, but without mummeries. Here is a great and grateful task, _e.g._, for the new ‘Society for Ethical Culture’ of Berlin: Let it constitute itself the voluntary guardian of the people’s morality. Doubtless the pornographists will attempt to turn it into ridicule. But the scorn will soon enough stick in their own throats. An association composed of the people’s leaders and instructors, professors, authors, members of Parliament, judges, high functionaries, has the power to exercise an irresistible boycott. Let the ‘Society for Ethical Culture’ undertake to examine into the morality of artistic and literary productions. Its composition would be a guarantee that the examination would not be narrow-minded, not prudish, and not canting. Its members have sufficient culture and taste to distinguish the thoughtlessness of a morally healthy artist from the vile speculation of a scribbling ruffian. When such a society, which would be joined by those men from the people who are the best fitted for this task, should, after serious investigation and in the consciousness of a heavy responsibility, say of a man, ‘He is a criminal!’ and of a work, ‘It is a disgrace to our nation!’ work and man would be annihilated. No respectable bookseller would keep the condemned book; no respectable paper would mention it, or give the author access to its columns; no respectable family would permit the branded work to be in their house; and the wholesome dread of this fate would very soon prevent the appearance of such books as Bahr’s _Gute Schule_, and would dishabituate the ‘realists’ from parading a condemnation based on a crime against morality as a mark of distinction.

Medical specialists of insanity have likewise failed to understand their duty. It is time for them to come to the front. ‘It is a prejudice,’ Bianchi most justly says,[481] ‘to believe that psychiatry must be enclosed within a sanctuary like that at Mecca.’ It is no doubt meritorious to indurate sections of the spinal cord in chromic acid, and tint them in a neutrophyllic solution, but this should not exhaust the activity of a professor of psychiatry. Neither is it sufficient that he should in addition give a few lectures to jurists, and publish observations in technical journals. Let him speak to the mass of cultivated persons who are neither physicians nor learned in law. Let him enlighten them in general publications and in accessible conferences concerning the leading facts in mental therapeutics. Let him show them the mental derangement of degenerate artists and authors, and teach them that the works in fashion are written and painted delirium. In all other branches of medical science it is discerned that hygiene is of more importance than therapeutics, and that the public health has much more to expect from prophylactics than from treatment. With us in Germany the psychiatrist alone fails as yet to concern himself with the hygiene of the mind. It is time that he should practise his profession in this direction also. A Maudsley in England, a Charcot, a Magnan in France, a Lombroso, a Tonnini in Italy, have brought to vast circles of the people an understanding of the obscure phenomena in the life of the mind, and disseminated knowledge which would make it impossible in those countries for pronounced lunatics with the mania for persecution to gain an influence over hundreds of thousands of electoral citizens,[482] even if it could not prevent the coming into fashion of the degenerate art. In Germany alone no psychiatrist has as yet followed this example. It is time to atone for this negligence. Popularized expositions from the pens of experts whose prominent official status would recommend them to the reader would restrain many healthy spirits from affiliating themselves with degenerate tendencies.

Such is the treatment of the disease of the age which I hold to be efficacious: Characterization of the leading degenerates as mentally diseased; unmasking and stigmatizing of their imitators as enemies to society; cautioning the public against the lies of these parasites.

We in particular, who have made it our life’s task to combat antiquated superstition, to spread enlightenment, to demolish historical ruins and remove their rubbish, to defend the freedom of the individual against State oppression and the mechanical routine of the Philistine; we must resolutely set ourselves in opposition to the miserable mongers who seize upon our dearest watchwords, with which to entrap the innocent. The ‘freedom’ and ‘modernity,’ the ‘progress’ and ‘truth,’ of these fellows are not ours. We have nothing in common with them. They wish for self-indulgence; we wish for work. They wish to drown consciousness in the unconscious; we wish to strengthen and enrich consciousness. They wish for evasive ideation and babble; we wish for attention, observation, and knowledge. The criterion by which true moderns may be recognised and distinguished from impostors calling themselves moderns may be this: Whoever preaches absence of discipline is an enemy of progress; and whoever worships his ‘I’ is an enemy to society. Society has for its first premise, neighbourly love and capacity for self-sacrifice; and progress is the effect of an ever more rigorous subjugation of the beast in man, of an ever tenser self-restraint, an ever keener sense of duty and responsibility. The emancipation for which we are striving is of the judgment, not of the appetites. In the profoundly penetrating words of Scripture (Matt. v. 17), ‘Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.’

FINIS.

BILLING AND SONS, PRINTERS, GUILDFORD

FOOTNOTES:

[1] This passage has been misunderstood. It has been taken to mean that all the French nation had degenerated, and their race was approaching its end. However, from the concluding paragraph of this chapter, it may be clearly seen that I had in my eye only the upper ten thousand. The peasant population, and a part of the working classes and the _bourgeoisie_, are sound. I assert only the decay of the rich inhabitants of great cities and the leading classes. It is they who have discovered _fin-de-siècle_, and it is to them also that _fin-de-race_ applies.

[2] ‘My thought I hasten to fulfil.’

[3] A four-act comedy, by H. Micard and F. de Jouvenot, named _Fin-de-Siècle_, which was played in Paris in 1890, hardly avails to determine the sense of the word as the French use it. The authors were concerned, not to depict a phase of the age or a psychological state, but only to give an attractive title to their piece.

[4] _Traité des Dégénérescences physiques, intellectuelles et morales de l’Espèce humaine et des Causes qui produisent ces Variétés maladives._ Par le Dr. B. A. Morel. Paris, 1857, p. 5.

[5] At the instigation of his mistress Ebergenyi, Count Chorinsky had poisoned his wife, previously an actress. The murderer was an epileptic, and a ‘degenerate,’ in the Morelian sense. His family summoned Morel from Normandy to Munich, for the purpose of proving to the jury, before whom the case (1868) was tried, that the accused was irresponsible. The latter was singularly indignant at this; and the Attorney-General also contradicted, in the most emphatic manner, the evidence of the French alienist, and supported himself by the approbation of the most prominent alienists in Munich. Chorinsky was pronounced guilty. Nevertheless, only a short time after his conviction, insanity developed itself in him, and a few months later he died, in the deepest mental darkness, thus justifying all the previous assertions of the French physician, who had, in the German tongue, demonstrated to a German jury the incompetence of his professional confrères in Munich.

[6] Morel, _op. cit._, p. 683.

[7] _L’Uomo delinquente in rapporto all’ Antropologia, Giurisprudenza e alle Discipline carcerarie._ 3ª edizione. Torino, 1884, p. 147 _et seq._ See also Dr. Ch. Féré, ‘La Famille nevropathique.’ Paris, 1894, pp. 176-212.

[8] ‘La Famille nevropathique,’ _Archives de Nevrologie_, 1884, _Nos. 19 et 20_.

[9] See, on this subject, in particular, Krafft Ebing, _Die Lehre vom moralischen Wahnsinn_, 1871; H. Maudsley, _Responsibility in Mental Disease_, International Scientific Series; and Ch. Féré, _Dégénérescence et Criminalité_, Paris, 1888.

[10] J. Roubinovitch, _Hystérie mâle et Dégénérescence_; Paris, 1890, p. 62: ‘The society which surrounds him (the degenerate) always remains strange to him. He knows nothing, and takes interest in nothing but himself.’

Legrain, _Du Délire chez les Dégénérés_; Paris, 1886, p. 10: ‘The patient is ... the plaything of his passions; he is carried away by his impulses, and has only one care--to satisfy his appetites.’ P. 27: ‘They are egoistical, arrogant, conceited, self-infatuated,’ etc.

[11] Henry Colin, _Essai sur l’État mental des Hystériques_; Paris, 1890, p. 59: ‘Two great facts control the being of the hereditary degenerate: obsession [the tyrannical domination of one thought from which a man cannot free himself; Westphal has created for this the good term ‘Zwangs-Vorstellung,’ _i.e._, coercive idea] and impulsion--both irresistible.’

[12] Morel, ‘Du Délire émotif,’ _Archives générales_, 6 série, vol. vii., pp. 385 and 530. See also Roubinovitch, _op. cit._, p. 53.

[13] Morel, ‘Du Délire panophobique des Aliénés gémisseurs,’ _Annales médico-psychologiques_, 1871.

[14] Roubinovitch, _op. cit._, p. 28.

[15] _Ibid._, p. 37.

[16] _Ibid._, p. 66.

[17] Charcot, ‘Leçons du Mardi à la Salpétrière,’ _Policlinique_, Paris, 1890, 2^e partie, p. 392: ‘This person [the invalid mentioned] is a performer at fairs; he calls himself “artist.” The truth is that his art consists in personating a “wild man” in fair-booths.’

[18] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 73: ‘The patients are perpetually tormented by a multitude of questions which invade their minds, and to which they can give no answer; inexpressible moral sufferings result from this incapacity. Doubt envelops every possible subject:--metaphysics, theology, etc.’

[19] Magnan, ‘Considérations sur la Folie des Héréditaires ou Dégénerés,’ _Progrès médical_, 1886, p. 1110 (in the report of a medical case): ‘He also thought of seeking for the philosopher’s stone, and of making gold.’

[20] Lombroso, ‘La Physionomie des Anarchistes,’ _Nouvelle Revue_, May 15, 1891, p. 227: ‘They [the anarchists] frequently have those characteristics of degeneracy which are common to criminals and lunatics, for they are anomalies, and bear hereditary taints.’ See also the same author’s _Pazzi ed Anomali_. Turin, 1884.

[21] Colin, _op. cit._, p. 154.

[22] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 11.

[23] Roubinovitch, _op. cit._, p. 33.

[24] Lombroso, _Genie und Irrsinn_; German translation by A. Courth. Reclam’s _Universal Bibliothek_, Bde. 2313-16. See also in particular, J. F. Nisbet, _The Insanity of Genius_. London, 1891.

[25] Falret, _Annales médico-psychologiques_, 1867, p. 76: ‘From their childhood they usually display a very unequal development of their mental faculties, which, weak in their entirety, are remarkable for certain special aptitudes; they have shown an extraordinary gift for drawing, arithmetic, music, sculpture, or mechanics ... and, together with those specially developed aptitudes, obtaining for them the fame of “infant phenomena,” they for the most part give evidence of very great deficiencies in their intelligence, and of a radical debility in the remaining faculties.’

[26] _Nouvelle Revue_, July 15, 1891.

[27] Tarabaud, _Des Rapports de la Dégénérescence mentale et de l’Hystérie_. Paris, 1888, p. 12.

[28] Legrain, _op. cit._, pp. 24 and 26.

[29] Lombroso, _Nouvelles recherches de Psychiatrie et d’Anthropologie criminelle_. Paris, 1892, p. 74.

[30] Axenfeld, _Des Névroses_. 2 vols., 2^e édition, revue et complétée par le Dr. Huchard. Paris, 1879.

[31] Paul Richer, _Études cliniques sur l’Hystéro-épilepsie ou Grande Hystérie_. Paris, 1891.

[32] Gilles de la Tourette, _Traité clinique et thérapeutique de l’Hystérie_. Paris, 1891.

[33] Paul Michaut, _Contribution à l’Étude des Manifestations de l’Hystérie chez l’Homme_. Paris, 1890.

[34] Colin, _op. cit._, p. 14.

[35] Gilles de la Tourette, _op. cit._, p. 548 _et passim_.

[36] Colin, _op. cit._, pp. 15 and 16.

[37] Gilles de la Tourette, _op. cit._, p. 493.

[38] _Ibid._, p. 303.

[39] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 39.

[40] Dr. Emile Berger, _Les Maladies des Yeux dans leurs rapports avec la Pathologie général_. Paris, 1892, p. 129 _et seq._

[41] _Traité clinique et thérapeutique de l’Hystérie_, p. 339. See also Drs. A. Marie et J. Bonnet, _La Vision chez les Idiots et les Imbéciles_. Paris, 1892.

[42] Alfred Binet, ‘Recherches sur les Altérations de la Conscience chez les Hystériques,’ _Revue philosophique_, 1889, vol. xxvii.

[43] _Op. cit._, p. 150.

[44] Ch. Féré, ‘Sensation et Mouvement,’ _Revue philosophique_, 1886. See also the same author’s _Sensation et Mouvement_, Paris, 1887; _Dégénérescence et criminalité_, Paris, 1888; and ‘L’Énergie et la Vitesse des Mouvements volontaires,’ _Revue philosophique_, 1889.

[45] Lombroso, _L’Uomo délinquente_, p. 524.

[46] ‘Les Nerveux se recherchent,’ Charcot, _Leçons du Mardi_, _passim_.

[47] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 173: ‘The true explanation of the occurrence of _folie à deux_ must be sought for, on the one hand, in the predisposition to insanity, and, on the other hand, in the accompanying weakness of mind.’ See also Régis, _La Folie à Deux_. Paris, 1880.

[48] _Journal des Goncourt._ Dernière série, premier volume, 1870-71. Paris, 1890, p. 17.

[49] Viennese for ‘fop.’--TRANSLATOR.

[50] _Traité des Dégénérescences_, _passim_.

[51] Personally communicated by the distinguished statistician, Herr Josef Körösi, Head of the Bureau of Statistics at Budapest.

[52] Speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Goschen, in the House of Commons, April 11, 1892.

[53] J. Vavasseur in the _Economiste français_ of 1890. See also _Bulletin de Statistique_ for 1891. The figures are uncertain, for they have been given differently by every statistician whom I have consulted. The fact of the increase in the consumption of alcohol alone stands out with certainty in all the publications consulted. Besides spirits, fermented drinks are consumed per head of the population, according to J. Körösi:

GREAT BRITAIN.

Wine. Beer and Cider.
Gall. Gall.

1830-1850 0.2 26
1880-1888 0.4 27

FRANCE.

1840-1842 23 3
1870-1872 25 6

PRUSSIA.

Quarts.
1839 13.48
1871 17.92

GERMAN EMPIRE.
Litres.
1872 81.7
1889-1890 90.3

[54] In France the general mortality was, from 1886 to 1890, 22.21 per 1,000. But in Paris it rose to 23.4; in Marseilles to 34.8; in all towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants to a mean of 28.31; in all places with less than 5,000 inhabitants to 21.74. (_La Médecine moderne_, year 1891.)

[55] _Traité des Dégénérescences_, pp. 614, 615.

[56] Brouardel, _La Semaine médicale_. Paris, 1887, p. 254. In this very remarkable study by the Parisian Professor, the following passage appears: ‘What will these [those remaining stationary in their development] young Parisians become by-and-by? Incapable of accomplishing a long and conscientious work, they excel, as a rule, in artistic activities. If they are painters they are stronger in colour than in drawing. If they are poets, the flow of their verses assures their success rather than the vigour of the thought.’

[57] The 26 German towns which to-day have more than 100,000 inhabitants, numbered altogether, in 1891, 6,000,000, and in 1835, 1,400,000. The 31 English towns of this category, in 1891, 10,870,000; in 1841, 4,590,000; the 11 French towns, in 1891, 4,180,000; in 1836, 1,710,000. It should be remarked that about a third of these 68 towns had not in 1840 as many generally as 100,000 inhabitants. To-day, in the large towns in Germany, France, and England, there reside 21,050,000 individuals, while in 1840 only 4,800,000 were living under these conditions. (Communicated by Herr Josef Körösi.)

[58] Féré, _La Semaine médicale_. Paris, 1890, p. 192.

[59] See, besides the lecture by Hofmann, the excellent book: _Eine deutsche Stadt vor 60 Jahren, Kulturgeschichtliche Skizze_, von Dr. Otto Bähr, 2 Auflage. Leipzig, 1891.

[60] In order not to make the footnotes too unwieldy, I state here that the following figures are borrowed in part from communications made by Herr Josef Körösi, in part from a remarkable study by M. Charles Richet: ‘Dans Cent Ans,’ _Revue scientifique_, 1891-92; and in a small degree from private publications (such as _Annuaire de la Presse_, _Press Directory_, etc.). For some of the figures I have also used, with profit, Mulhall, and the speech of Herr von Stephan to the Reichstag, February 4, 1892.

[61] See G. André, _Les nouvelles maladies nerveuses_. Paris, 1892.

[62] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 251: ‘Drinkers are “degenerates”;’ and p. 258 (after four reports of invalids which serve as a basis to the following summary): ‘Hence, at the base of all forms of alcoholism we find mental degeneracy.’

[63] _Revue scientifique_, year 1892; vol. xlix., p. 168 _et seq._

[64] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 266.

[65] Quoted by J. Roubinovitch, _Hystérie mâle et Dégénérescence_, p. 18.

[66] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 200.

[67] The scientific psychologist will perhaps read with impatience expositions with which he is so familiar; but they are, unfortunately, not superfluous for a very numerous class of even highly educated persons, who have never had instruction in the laws of the operations of the brain.

[68] Mosso’s experiments on, and observations of, the exposed surface of the brain during trepanning have quite established this fact.

[69] The experiments of Ferrier, it is true, have led him to deny that a stimulus which touches the cortex of the frontal lobes can result in movement. The case, nevertheless, is not so simple as Ferrier sees it to be. A portion of the energy which is set free by the peripheral stimulus in the cells of the cortex of the frontal lobes certainly transmutes itself into a motor impulse, even if the immediate stimulation of the anterior brain releases no muscular contractions. But this is not the place to defend this point against Ferrier.

[70] A. Herzen is the author of the hypothesis that consciousness is connected with the destruction of organic connections in the brain-cells, and the restoration of this connection with rest, sleep, and unconsciousness. All we know of the chemical composition of the secretions in sleeping and waking points to the correctness of this hypothesis.

[71]

‘One tread moves a thousand threads,
The shuttles dart to and fro,
The threads flow on invisible,
One stroke sets up a thousand ties.’

[72] Karl Abel, _Ueber den Gegensinn der Urworte_. Leipzig, 1884.

[73] James Sully, _Illusions_. London, 1881.

[74] Th. Ribot, _Psychologie de l’Attention_. Paris, 1889.

[75] It is possible that an active expansion of the bloodvessels does not take place, but only a contraction. It has been lately denied that there are any nerves of vascular dilatation (_inter alia_ by Dr. Morat, _La Semaine médicale_, 1892, p. 112). But the effect may be the same in both cases. For through the contraction of the vessels in a single brain-circuit, the dislodged blood would be driven to other portions of the brain, and these would experience a greater access of blood, just as if their vessels were actively dilated.

[76] When I wrote these words I was under the impression that I was the sole originator of the physiological theory of attention therein set forth. Since the appearance of this book, however, I have read Alfred Lehmann’s work, _Die Hypnose und die damit verwandten normalen Zustände_, Leipzig, 1890, and have there (pp. 27 _et seq._) found my theory in almost identical words. Lehmann, then, published it two years before I did, which fact I here duly acknowledge. That we arrived at this conclusion independently of each other would testify that the hypothesis of vaso-motor reflex action is really explanatory. Wundt (_Hypnotismus und Suggestion_, Leipzig, 1892, pp. 27-30), it is true, criticises Lehmann’s work, but he seems to agree with this hypothesis--which is also mine--or, at least, raises no objection to it.

[77] _Brain_, January, 1886, quoted by Ribot, _Psychologie de l’Attention_, p. 68.

[78] Ribot, _op. cit._, pp. 106 and 119.

[79] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 177.

[80] _Ibid._, p. 156.

[81] In the chapter which treats of French Neomystics, I shall give a cluster of such disconnected and mutually exclusive expressions, which are quite parallel with the instances cited by Legrain, of the manner of speech among those acknowledged to be of weak mind. In this place only one passage may be repeated from the V^{te} E. M. de Vogué, _Le Roman Russe_, Paris, 1888, in which this mystical author, unconsciously and involuntarily, characterizes admirably the shadowiness and emptiness of mystic diction, while praising it as something superior. ‘One trait,’ he says (p. 215), ‘they’ (certain Russian authors) ‘have in common, viz., the art of awakening series of feelings and thoughts by a line, a word, by endless re-echoings [_résonnances_].... The words you read on this paper appear to be written, not in length, but in depth. They leave behind them a train of faint reverberations, which are gradually lost, no one knows where.’ And p. 227: ‘They see men and things in the gray light of earliest dawn. The weakly indicated outlines end in a confused and clouded “perhaps.” ...’

[82] ‘It is certain that the Beautiful never has such charms for us as when we read it attentively in a language which we only half understand. It is the ambiguity, the uncertainty, _i.e._. the pliability of words, which is one of their greatest advantages, and renders it possible to make an exact [!] use of them.’--Joubert, quoted by Charles Morice, _La Littérature de tout-à-l’heure_. Paris, 1889, p. 171.

[83] Gérard de Nerval, _Le Rêve et la Vie_, Paris, 1868, p. 53: ‘Everything in Nature assumed a different aspect. Mysterious voices issued from plants, trees, animals, the smallest insects, to warn and to encourage me. I discerned mysterious turns in the utterances of my companions, and understood their purport. Even formless and inanimate things ministered to the workings of my mind.’ Here is a perfect instance of that ‘comprehension of the mysterious’ which is one of the most common fancies of the insane.

[84] An imbecile degenerate, the history of whose illness is related by Dr. G. Ballet, said: ‘Il y a mille ans que le monde est monde. Milan, la cathédrale de Milan’ (_La Semaine médicale_, 1892, p. 133). ‘Mille ans’ (a thousand years) calls up in his consciousness the like-sounding word ‘Milan,’ although there is absolutely no rational connection between the two ideas. A graphomaniac named Jasno, whose case is cited by Lombroso, says ‘la main se mène’ (the hand guides itself). He then begins to speak of ‘semaine’ (week), and continues to play upon the like-sounding words ‘se mène,’ ‘semaine,’ and ‘main’ (_Genie und Irsinn_, p. 264). In the book of a German graphomaniac entitled _Rembrandt als Erzieher_, Leipzig, 1890 (a book which I shall have to refer to more than once, as an example of the lucubrations of a weak mind), I find, on the very first pages, the following juxtaposition of words according to their resemblance in sound: ‘Sie verkünden eine Rückkehr ... zur Einheit und Feinheit’ (p. 3). ‘Je ungeschliffener Jemand ist, desto mehr ist an ihm zu schleifen’ (p. 4). ‘Jede rechte Bildung ist bildend, formend, schöpferisch, und also künstlerisch’ (p. 8). ‘Rembrandt war nicht nur ein protestantischer Künstler, sondern auch ein künstlerischer Protestant’ (p. 14). ‘Sein Hundert guldenblatt allein könnte schon als ein Tausendgüldenkraut gegen so mancherlei Schäden ... dienen’ (p. 23). ‘Christus und Rembrandt haben ... darin etwas Gemeinsames, dass Jener die religiöse, dieser die künstlerische Armseligkeit--die Seligkeit der Armen--zu ... Ehren bringt’ (p. 25.), etc.

[85] Dr. Paul Sollier, _Psychologie de l’Idiot et de l’Imbécile_. Paris, 1891, p. 153.

[86] _Poems by Dante Gabriel Rossetti._ With a memoir of the author by Franz Hüffer. Leipzig, 1873, p. viii.

[87] Gustave Freytag, _Bilder aus der deutschen Vergangenheit_, Bd. I.: ‘Aus dem Mittelalter.’ Leipzig, 1872, § 266. H. Taine, _Histoire de la Littérature anglaise_. Paris, 1866, 2^e édition, vol. i., p. 46.

[88] This is not an arbitrary assertion. One of D. G. Rossetti’s most famous poems, of which further mention will be made, _Eden Bowers_, treats of the pre-Adamite Lilith.

[89] J. Ruskin, _Modern Painters_, American edition, vol. i., pp. xxi. _et seq._

[90] Ruskin, _op. cit._, p. 24.

[91] _Ibid._, p. 26.

[92] ‘BALLADE QUE VILLON FEIT À LA REQUESTE DE SA MÈRE POUR PRIER NOSTRE DAME.

‘Femme je suis povrette et ancienne.
Que riens ne scay, oncques lettres ne leuz,
Au Monstier voy (dont suis parroissienne)
Paradis painct, ou sont harpes et luz,
Et ung enfer, où damnez sont boulluz,
L’ung me faict paour, l’autre joye et liesse,
La joye avoir faictz moy (haulte deesse)
A qui pecheurs doivent tous recourir
Combley de foy, sans faincte ne paresse,
En ceste foy je vueil vivre et mourir.’

It is significant that the pre-Raphaelite Rossetti has translated this very poem of Villon, _His Mother’s Service to Our Lady_. _Poems_, p. 180.

[93] Edward Rod, _Études sur le XIX. Siècle_. Paris et Lausanne, 1888, p. 89.

[94] Rossetti, _Poems_, p. 277.

[95]

‘The springing green, the violet’s scent,
The trill of lark, the blackbird’s note,
Sunshowers soft, and balmy breeze:
If I sing such words as these,
Needs there any grander thing
To praise thee with, O day of spring?’

[96] Rod, _op. cit._, p. 67.

[97] _Poems_, p. 16.

[98] Sollier, _Psychologie de l’Idiot et de l’Imbécile_, p. 184. See also Lombroso, _The Man of Genius_ (Contemporary Science Series), London, 1891, p. 216. A special characteristic found in literary mattoids, and also, as we have already seen, in the insane, is that of repeating some words or phrases hundreds of times in the same page. Thus, in one of Passanante’s chapters the word _riprovate_ (blame) occurs about 143 times.

[99] _Poems_, p. 31.

[100] _Poems_, p. 247.

[101] Algernon Charles Swinburne, _Poems and Ballads_. London: Chatto and Windus, 1889, p. 247.

[102]

‘The Runic stone stands out in the sea,
There sit I with my dreams,
‘Mid whistling winds and wailing gulls,
And wandering, foaming waves.
I have loved many a lovely child,
And many a good comrade--
Where are they gone? The wind whistles,
The waves wander foaming on.’

[103] William Morris, _Poems_ (Tauchnitz edition), p. 169:

‘And if it hap that ...
My master, Geoffrey Chaucer, thou do meet,
Then speak ... the words:
“O master! O thou great of heart and tongue!”’...

[104] A history of the commencement of this society has been written by one of the members, Mathias Morhardt. See ‘Les Symboliques,’ _Nouvelle Revue_ du 15 Février, 1892, p. 765.

[105] Charles Morice, _La Littérature de tout-à-l’heure_. Paris, 1889, p. 274.

[106] Jules Huret, _Enquête sur l’Évolution littéraire_. Paris, 1891, p. 65.

[107] Charles Morice, _op. cit._, p. 271.

[108] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 14.

[109] V^{te} E. M. de Vogüé, _op. cit._, p. xix _et seq._

[110] Morice, _op. cit._, pp. 5, 103, 177.

[111] _Rembrandt als Erzieher._ Leipzig, 1890, p. 2.

[112] Edouard Rod, _Les Idées morales du Temps présent_. Paris, 1892, p. 66.

[113] Paul Desjardins, _Le Devoir présent_. Paris, 1892, pp. 5, 8, 39.

[114] F. Paulhan, _Le nouveau Mysticisme_. Paris, 1891, p. 120.

[115] Pierre Janet, ‘Les Actes inconscients et le Dédoublement de la Personalité,’ Revue philosophique, December, 1886. Paul Janet, ‘L’Hystérie et l’Hypnotisme d’après la Théorie de la double Personnalité,’ Revue scientifique, 1888, 1^{er} vol., p. 616

[116] Morhardt, _op. cit._, p. 769.

[117] See the Catalogue of Scientific Papers compiled and published by the Royal Society. The first series of this catalogue, covering the time from 1800 to 1863, comprises six volumes; the second, dealing with the decade from 1864 to 1873, comprises two volumes, equivalent to at least three of the first series (1047 and 1310 pages); of the third series (1874 to 1883) only one volume has been issued as yet, but it promises to outrun the second by at least one half.

[118] Jules Huret, _Enquête sur l’Évolution littéraire_. Paris, 1891.

[119] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 65.

[120] Paul Verlaine, _Choix de Poësies_. Paris, 1891.

[121] Lombroso, _L’Uomo delinquente_, p. 184.

[122] Lombroso, _op. cit._, p. 276.

[123] Verlaine, _op. cit._, p. 272.

[124] Verlaine, _op. cit._, pp. 72, 315, 317.

[125] Shortly, but not immediately after, the immediate result being a sense of great relief and satisfaction.

[126] Verlaine, _op. cit._, pp. 175, 178.

[127] Legrain, _Du délire chez les dégénéres_, pp. 135, 140, 164.

[128] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 8.

[129] E. Marandon de Montyel, ‘De la Criminalité et de la Dégénérescence,’ _Archives de l’Anthropologie criminelle_, Mai, 1892, p. 287.

[130]

Ah! if these are dream hands,
So much the better, or so much the worse, or so much the better.

[131] Virgil’s ‘lentus,’ when applied to aspects of nature conveys a very different meaning.

[132] Charles Morice, _La Littérature de tout-à-l’heure_, p. 238.

[133] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 33.

[134] Since these words were written, M. Mallarmé has decided to publish his poems in one volume. This, far from invalidating what has been said, is its best justification.

[135] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 55.

[136] Hartmann, _Der Gorilla_. Leipzig, 1881, p. 34.

[137] Dr. L. Frigerio, _L’Oreille externe: Étude d’Anthropologie criminelle_. Lyon, 1889, pp. 32 and 40.

[138] Lombroso, _L’Uomo delinquente_, p. 255.

[139] Huret, _op. cit._, p. 102.

[140] _Ibid._, p. 106.

[141] _Ibid._, p. 401.

[142] Jean Moréas, _Le Pélerin passionné_. Paris, 1891, p. 3.

[143] Moréas, _op. cit._, pp. 21 and 2.

[144] _Ibid._, p. 43.

[145] Moréas, _op. cit._, p. 311.

[146]

‘O Syrinx! do you see and understand the Earth, and the wonder of this
morning, and the circulation of life!
O thou, there! and I, here! O thou! O me! All is in All!’

[147] Morice, _op. cit._, p. 30.

[148] Morice, _op. cit._, p. 321.

[149] Dr. F. Suarez de Mendoza, _L’Audition colorée: Étude sur les fausses Sensations secondaires physiologiques_. Paris, 1892.

[150] Alfred Binet, ‘Recherche sur les altérations de la conscience chez les hystériques,’ _Revue philosophique_, 1889, 27^e vol., p. 165.

[151] Legrain, _op. cit._, p. 162.

[152] Lombroso, _Genie und Irrsinn_. German edition, p. 233.

[153] I may here be allowed to remind my readers that in the year 1885, and, accordingly, before the promulgation of the professed symbolistic programme, I laid down in my _Paradoxe_ (popular edition, part ii., p. 253) the principle that the poet must ‘to the majority of his readers utter the deep saying, “_Tat twam asi!_”--“That art thou!” of the Indian sage,’ and ‘must be able, with the ancient Romans, to repeat to the sound and normally developed man, “_Of thee is the fable related_.” In other words, the poem must be “symbolical” in the sense that it brings into view characters, destinies, feelings and laws of life which are universal.’

[154] Hugues Le Roux, _Portraits de Cire_. Paris, 1891, p. 129.

[155] V^{te} E. M. de Vogüé, _Le Roman russe_. Paris, 1888, p. 293 _et seq._

[156] See, in _War and Peace_ (Leo. N. Tolstoi’s collected works, published, with the author’s sanction, by Raphael Löwenfeld, Berlin, 1892, vols. v.-viii.), the soldiers’ talk, part i., p. 252; the scene at the outposts, p. 314 _et seq._, the description of the troops on the march, p. 332; the death of Count Besuchoi, pp. 142-145; the coursing, part ii., pp. 383-407, etc.

[157] See, in _War and Peace_, the thoughts of the wounded Prince Andrej, part i., p. 516; Count Peter’s conversation with the freemason and Martinief Basdjejeff, part ii., pp. 106-114, etc.

[158] _War and Peace_, the episode of Princess Maria and her suitor, part i., pp. 420-423; the confinement of the little Princess, part ii., pp. 58-65; and all the passages where Count Rostoff sees the Emperor Alexander, or where the author speaks of the Emperor Napoleon I., etc.

[159] Vogüé, _op. cit._, p. 282.

[160] Count Leo Tolstoi, _A Short Exposition of the Gospel_. From the Russian, by Paul Lauterbach. Leipzig: Reclam’s Universal-Bibliothek, p. 13.

[161] L. Tolstoi, _Short Exposition of the Gospel_, p. 13.

[162] Tolstoi, _Short Exposition_, etc., p. 172.