EP1CH14
　　CHAPTERXIV
　　Soonafterthisthechildrencameintosaygoodnight。Theykissedeveryone，thetutorsandgovernessesmadetheirbows，andtheywentout。OnlyyoungNicholasandhistutorremained。Dessalleswhisperedtotheboytocomedownstairs。
　　"No，MonsieurDessalles，Iwillaskmyaunttoletmestay，"repliedNicholasBolkonskialsoinawhisper。
　　"Matante，pleaseletmestay，"saidhe，goinguptohisaunt。
　　Hisfaceexpressedentreaty，agitation，andecstasy。CountessMaryglancedathimandturnedtoPierre。
　　"Whenyouareherehecan’ttearhimselfaway，"shesaid。
　　"Iwillbringhimtoyoudirectly，MonsieurDessalles。Goodnight！"saidPierre，givinghishandtotheSwisstutor，andheturnedtoyoungNicholaswithasmile。"YouandIhaven’tseenanythingofoneanotheryet……Howlikeheisgrowing，Mary！"headded，addressingCountessMary。
　　"Likemyfather？"askedtheboy，flushingcrimsonandlookingupatPierrewithbright，ecstaticeyes。
　　Pierrenodded，andwentonwithwhathehadbeensayingwhenthechildrenhadinterrupted。CountessMarysatdowndoingwoolwork；
　　Natashadidnottakehereyesoffherhusband。NicholasandDenisovrose，askedfortheirpipes，smoked，wenttofetchmoreteafromSonya—whosatwearybutresoluteatthesamovar—andquestionedPierre。Thecurly—headed，delicateboysatwithshiningeyesunnoticedinacorner，startingeverynowandthenandmutteringsomethingtohimself，andevidentlyexperiencinganewandpowerfulemotionasheturnedhiscurlyhead，withhisthinneckexposedbyhisturn—downcollar，towardtheplacewherePierresat。
　　Theconversationturnedonthecontemporarygossipaboutthoseinpower，inwhichmostpeopleseethechiefinterestofhomepolitics。
　　Denisov，dissatisfiedwiththegovernmentonaccountofhisowndisappointmentsintheservice，heardwithpleasureofthethingsdoneinPetersburgwhichseemedtohimstupid，andmadeforcibleandsharpcommentsonwhatPierretoldthem。
　　"OneusedtohavetobeaGerman—nowonemustdancewithTatawinovaandMadameKwudener，andweadEcka’tshausenandthebwethwen。Oh，theyshouldletthatfinefellowBonapartelose—he’dknockallthisnonsenseoutofthem！FancygivingthecommandoftheSemenovwegimenttoafellowlikethatSchwa’tz！"hecried。
　　Nicholas，thoughfreefromDenisov’sreadinesstofindfaultwitheverything，alsothoughtthatdiscussionofthegovernmentwasaveryseriousandweightymatter，andthefactthatAhadbeenappointedMinisterofThisandBGovernorGeneralofThat，andthattheEmperorhadsaidso—and—soandthisministerso—and—so，seemedtohimveryimportant。AndsohethoughtitnecessarytotakeaninterestinthesethingsandtoquestionPierre。Thequestionsputbythesetwokepttheconversationfromchangingitsordinarycharacterofgossipaboutthehighergovernmentcircles。
　　ButNatasha，knowingallherhusband’swaysandideas，sawthathehadlongbeenwishingbuthadbeenunabletodiverttheconversationtoanotherchannelandexpresshisowndeeplyfeltideaforthesakeofwhichhehadgonetoPetersburgtoconsultwithhisnewfriendPrinceTheodore，andshehelpedhimbyaskinghowhisaffairswithPrinceTheodorehadgone。
　　"Whatwasitabout？"askedNicholas。
　　"Alwaysthesamething，"saidPierre，lookingroundathislisteners。"Everybodyseesthatthingsaregoingsobadlythattheycannotbeallowedtogoonsoandthatitisthedutyofalldecentmentocounteractitasfarastheycan。"
　　"Whatcandecentmendo？"Nicholasinquired，frowningslightly。
　　"Whatcanbedone？"
　　"Why，this……"
　　"Comeintomystudy，"saidNicholas。
　　Natasha，whohadlongexpectedtobefetchedtonurseherbaby，nowheardthenursecallingherandwenttothenursery。CountessMaryfollowedher。ThemenwentintothestudyandlittleNicholasBolkonskifollowedthemunnoticedbyhisuncleandsatdownatthewritingtableinashadycornerbythewindow。
　　"Well，whatwouldyoudo？"askedDenisov。
　　"Alwayssomefantasticschemes，"saidNicholas。
　　"Whythis，"beganPierre，notsittingdownbutpacingtheroom，sometimesstoppingshort，gesticulating，andlisping："thepositioninPetersburgisthis：theEmperordoesnotlookintoanything。Hehasabandonedhimselfaltogethertothismysticism"Pierrecouldnottoleratemysticisminanyonenow。"Heseeksonlyforpeace，andonlythesepeoplesansfoiniloi*cangiveithim—peoplewhorecklesslyhackatandstrangleeverything—Magnitski，Arakcheev，andtuttiquanti……Youwillagreethatifyoudidnotlookafteryourestatesyourselfbutonlywantedaquietlife，theharsheryourstewardwasthemorereadilyyourobjectmightbeattained，"hesaidtoNicholas。
　　*Withoutfaithorlaw。
　　"Well，whatdoesthatleadupto？"saidNicholas。
　　"Well，everythingisgoingtoruin！Robberyinthelawcourts，inthearmynothingbutflogging，drilling，andMilitarySettlements；thepeoplearetortured，enlightenmentissuppressed。Allthatisyoungandhonestiscrushed！Everyoneseesthatthiscannotgoon。
　　Everythingisstrainedtosuchadegreethatitwillcertainlybreak，"
　　saidPierreasthosewhoexaminetheactionsofanygovernmenthavealwayssaidsincegovernmentsbegan。"ItoldthemjustonethinginPetersburg。"
　　"Toldwhom？"
　　"Well，youknowwhom，"saidPierre，withameaningglancefromunderhisbrows。"PrinceTheodoreandallthose。Toencouragecultureandphilanthropyisallverywellofcourse。Theaimisexcellentbutinthepresentcircumstancessomethingelseisneeded。"
　　AtthatmomentNicholasnoticedthepresenceofhisnephew。Hisfacedarkenedandhewentuptotheboy。
　　"Whyareyouhere？"
　　"Why？Lethimbe，"saidPierre，takingNicholasbythearmandcontinuing。"Thatisnotenough，Itoldthem。Somethingelseisneeded。Whenyoustandexpectingtheoverstrainedstringtosnapatanymoment，wheneveryoneisexpectingtheinevitablecatastrophe，asmanyaspossiblemustjoinhandsascloselyastheycantowithstandthegeneralcalamity。Everythingthatisyoungandstrongisbeingenticedawayanddepraved。Oneisluredbywomen，anotherbyhonors，athirdbyambitionormoney，andtheygoovertothatcamp。
　　Noindependentmen，suchasyouorI，areleft。WhatIsayiswidenthescopeofoursociety，letthemotd’ordrebenotvirtuealonebutindependenceandactionaswell！"
　　Nicholas，whohadlefthisnephew，irritablypushedupanarmchair，satdowninit，andlistenedtoPierre，coughingdiscontentedlyandfrowningmoreandmore。
　　"Butactionwithwhataim？"hecried。"Andwhatpositionwillyouadopttowardthegovernment？"
　　"Why，thepositionofassistants。Thesocietyneednotbesecretifthegovernmentallowsit。Notmerelyisitnothostiletogovernment，butitisasocietyoftrueconservatives—asocietyofgentlemeninthefullmeaningofthatword。ItisonlytopreventsomePugachevorotherfromkillingmychildrenandyours，andArakcheevfromsendingmeofftosomeMilitarySettlement。Wejoinhandsonlyforthepublicwelfareandthegeneralsafety。"
　　"Yes，butit’sasecretsocietyandthereforeahostileandharmfulonewhichcanonlycauseharm。"
　　"Why？DidtheTugendbundwhichsavedEurope"theydidnotthenventuretosuggestthatRussiahadsavedEurope"doanyharm？TheTugendbundisanallianceofvirtue：itislove，mutualhelp……itiswhatChristpreachedontheCross。"
　　Natasha，whohadcomeinduringtheconversation，lookedjoyfullyatherhusband。Itwasnotwhathewassayingthatpleasedher—thatdidnoteveninteresther，foritseemedtoherthatwasallextremelysimpleandthatshehadknownitalongtimeitseemedsotoherbecausesheknewthatitsprangfromPierre’swholesoul，butitwashisanimatedandenthusiasticappearancethatmadeherglad。
　　Theboywiththethinneckstretchingoutfromtheturn—downcollar—
　　whomeveryonehadforgotten—gazedatPierrewithevengreaterandmorerapturousjoy。EverywordofPierre’sburnedintohisheart，andwithanervousmovementofhisfingersheunconsciouslybrokethesealingwaxandquillpenshishandscameupononhisuncle’stable。
　　"Itisnotatallwhatyousuppose；butthatiswhattheGermanTugendbundwas，andwhatIamproposing。"
　　"No，myfwiend！TheTugendbundisallvewywellforthesausageeaters，butIdon’tunderstanditandcan’tevenpwonounceit，"
　　interposedDenisovinaloudandresolutevoice。"Iagweethatevewythinghereiswottenandhowwible，buttheTugendbundIdon’tunderstand。Ifwe’renotsatisfied，letushaveabuntofourown。
　　That’sallwight。Jesuisvot’ehomme！"*
　　*"I’myourman。"
　　Pierresmiled，Natashabegantolaugh，butNicholasknittedhisbrowsstillmoreandbeganprovingtoPierrethattherewasnoprospectofanygreatchangeandthatallthedangerhespokeofexistedonlyinhisimagination。Pierremaintainedthecontrary，andashismentalfacultiesweregreaterandmoreresourceful，Nicholasfelthimselfcornered。Thismadehimstillangrier，forhewasfullyconvinced，notbyreasoningbutbysomethingwithinhimstrongerthanreason，ofthejusticeofhisopinion。
　　"Iwilltellyouthis，"hesaid，risingandtryingwithnervouslytwitchingfingerstopropuphispipeinacorner，butfinallyabandoningtheattempt。"Ican’tproveittoyou。Yousaythateverythinghereisrottenandthatanoverthrowiscoming：Idon’tseeit。Butyoualsosaythatouroathofallegianceisaconditionalmatter，andtothatIreply：’Youaremybestfriend，asyouknow，butifyouformedasecretsocietyandbeganworkingagainstthegovernment—beitwhatitmay—Iknowitismydutytoobeythegovernment。AndifArakcheevorderedmetoleadasquadronagainstyouandcutyoudown，Ishouldnothesitateaninstant，butshoulddoit。’
　　Andyoumayargueaboutthatasyoulike！"
　　Anawkwardsilencefollowedthesewords。Natashawasthefirsttospeak，defendingherhusbandandattackingherbrother。Herdefensewasweakandinaptbutsheattainedherobject。Theconversationwasresumed，andnolongerintheunpleasantlyhostiletoneofNicholas’
　　lastremark。
　　Whentheyallgotuptogointosupper，littleNicholasBolkonskiwentuptoPierre，paleandwithshining，radianteyes。
　　"UnclePierre，you……no……IfPapawerealive……wouldheagreewithyou？"heasked。
　　AndPierresuddenlyrealizedwhataspecial，independent，complex，andpowerfulprocessofthoughtandfeelingmusthavebeengoingoninthisboyduringthatconversation，andrememberingallhehadsaidheregrettedthattheladshouldhaveheardhim。Hehad，however，togivehimananswer。
　　"Yes，Ithinkso，"hesaidreluctantly，andleftthestudy。
　　Theladlookeddownandseemednowforthefirsttimetonoticewhathehaddonetothethingsonthetable。HeflushedandwentuptoNicholas。
　　"Uncle，forgiveme，Ididthat……unintentionally，"hesaid，pointingtothebrokensealingwaxandpens。
　　Nicholasstartedangrily。
　　"Allright，allright，"hesaid，throwingthebitsunderthetable。
　　Andevidentlysuppressinghisvexationwithdifficulty，heturnedawayfromtheboy。
　　"Yououghtnottohavebeenhereatall，"hesaid。
　　EP1CH15
　　CHAPTERXV
　　Theconversationatsupperwasnotaboutpoliticsorsocieties，butturnedonthesubjectNicholaslikedbest—recollectionsof1812。DenisovstartedtheseandPierrewasparticularlyagreeableandamusingaboutthem。Thefamilyseparatedonthemostfriendlyterms。
　　AftersupperNicholas，havingundressedinhisstudyandgiveninstructionstothestewardwhohadbeenwaitingforhim，wenttothebedroominhisdressinggown，wherehefoundhiswifestillathertable，writing。
　　"Whatareyouwriting，Mary？"Nicholasasked。
　　CountessMaryblushed。Shewasafraidthatwhatshewaswritingwouldnotbeunderstoodorapprovedbyherhusband。
　　Shehadwantedtoconcealwhatshewaswritingfromhim，butatthesametimewasgladhehadsurprisedheratitandthatshewouldnowhavetotellhim。
　　"Adiary，Nicholas，"shereplied，handinghimablueexercisebookfilledwithherfirm，boldwriting。
　　"Adiary？"Nicholasrepeatedwithashadeofirony，andhetookupthebook。
　　ItwasinFrench。
　　December4。TodaywhenAndrushahereldestboywokeuphedidnotwishtodressandMademoiselleLouisesentforme。Hewasnaughtyandobstinate。Itriedthreats，butheonlygrewangrier。ThenItookthematterinhand：Ilefthimaloneandbeganwithnurse’shelptogettheotherchildrenup，tellinghimthatIdidnotlovehim。Foralongtimehewassilent，asifastonished，thenhejumpedoutofbed，rantomeinhisshirt，andsobbedsothatIcouldnotcalmhimforalongtime。Itwasplainthatwhattroubledhimmostwasthathehadgrievedme。AfterwardsintheeveningwhenIgavehimhisticket，heagainbegancryingpiteouslyandkissingme。Onecandoanythingwithhimbytenderness。
　　"Whatisa’ticket’？"Nicholasinquired。
　　"Ihavebegungivingtheelderonesmarkseveryevening，showinghowtheyhavebehaved。"
　　Nicholaslookedintotheradianteyesthatweregazingathim，andcontinuedtoturnoverthepagesandread。Inthediarywassetdowneverythinginthechildren’slivesthatseemednoteworthytotheirmotherasshowingtheircharactersorsuggestinggeneralreflectionsoneducationalmethods。Theywereforthemostpartquiteinsignificanttrifles，butdidnotseemsotothemotherortothefathereither，nowthathereadthisdiaryabouthischildrenforthefirsttime。
　　Underthedate"5"wasentered：
　　Mityawasnaughtyattable。Papasaidhewastohavenopudding。
　　Hehadnone，butlookedsounhappilyandgreedilyattheotherswhiletheywereeating！Ithinkthatpunishmentbydeprivingchildrenofsweetsonlydevelopstheirgreediness。MusttellNicholasthis。
　　Nicholasputdownthebookandlookedathiswife。Theradianteyesgazedathimquestioningly：wouldheapproveordisapproveofherdiary？Therecouldbenodoubtnotonlyofhisapprovalbutalsoofhisadmirationforhiswife。
　　Perhapsitneednotbedonesopedantically，thoughtNicholas，orevendoneatall，butthisuntiring，continualspiritualeffortofwhichthesoleaimwasthechildren’smoralwelfaredelightedhim。HadNicholasbeenabletoanalyzehisfeelingshewouldhavefoundthathissteady，tender，andproudloveofhiswiferestedonhisfeelingofwonderatherspiritualityandattheloftymoralworld，almostbeyondhisreach，inwhichshehadherbeing。
　　Hewasproudofherintelligenceandgoodness，recognizedhisowninsignificancebesideherinthespiritualworld，andrejoicedallthemorethatshewithsuchasoulnotonlybelongedtohimbutwaspartofhimself。
　　"Iquite，quiteapprove，mydearest！"saidhewithasignificantlook，andafterashortpauseheadded："AndIbehavedbadlytoday。
　　Youweren’tinthestudy。Webegandisputing—PierreandI—andIlostmytemper。Butheisimpossible：suchachild！Idon’tknowwhatwouldbecomeofhimifNatashadidn’tkeephiminhand……HaveyouanyideawhyhewenttoPetersburg？Theyhaveformed……"
　　"Yes，Iknow，"saidCountessMary。"Natashatoldme。"
　　"Well，then，youknow，"Nicholaswenton，growinghotatthemererecollectionoftheirdiscussion，"hewantedtoconvincemethatitiseveryhonestman’sdutytogoagainstthegovernment，andthattheoathofallegianceandduty……Iamsorryyouweren’tthere。Theyallfellonme—DenisovandNatasha……Natashaisabsurd。Howsherulesoverhim！Andyetthereneedonlybeadiscussionandshehasnowordsofherownbutonlyrepeatshissayings……"addedNicholas，yieldingtothatirresistibleinclinationwhichtemptsustojudgethosenearestanddearesttous。HeforgotthatwhathewassayingaboutNatashacouldhavebeenappliedwordforwordtohimselfinrelationtohiswife。
　　"Yes，Ihavenoticedthat，"saidCountessMary。
　　"WhenItoldhimthatdutyandtheoathwereaboveeverything，hestartedprovinggoodnessknowswhat！Apityyouwerenotthere—whatwouldyouhavesaid？"
　　"AsIseeityouwerequiteright，andItoldNatashaso。Pierresayseverybodyissuffering，tortured，andbeingcorrupted，andthatitisourdutytohelpourneighbor。Ofcourseheisrightthere，"
　　saidCountessMary，"butheforgetsthatwehaveotherdutiesnearertous，dutiesindicatedtousbyGodHimself，andthatthoughwemightexposeourselvestoriskswemustnotriskourchildren。"
　　"Yes，that’sit！That’sjustwhatIsaidtohim，"putinNicholas，whofanciedhereallyhadsaidit。"Buttheyinsistedontheirownview：loveofone’sneighborandChristianity—andallthisinthepresenceofyoungNicholas，whohadgoneintomystudyandbrokeallmythings。"
　　"Ah，Nicholas，doyouknowIamoftentroubledaboutlittleNicholas，"saidCountessMary。"Heissuchanexceptionalboy。IamafraidIneglecthiminfavorofmyown：weallhavechildrenandrelationswhilehehasnoone。Heisconstantlyalonewithhisthoughts。"
　　"Well，Idon’tthinkyouneedreproachyourselfonhisaccount。
　　Allthatthefondestmothercoulddoforhersonyouhavedoneandaredoingforhim，andofcourseIamgladofit。Heisafinelad，afinelad！ThiseveninghelistenedtoPierreinasortoftrance，andfancy—asweweregoingintosupperIlookedandhehadbrokeneverythingonmytabletobits，andhetoldmeofithimselfatonce！Ineverknewhimtotellanuntruth。Afinelad，afinelad！"
　　repeatedNicholas，whoatheartwasnotfondofNicholasBolkonskibutwasalwaysanxioustorecognizethathewasafinelad。
　　"Still，Iamnotthesameashisownmother，"saidCountessMary。"I
　　feelIamnotthesameandittroublesme。Awonderfulboy，butIamdreadfullyafraidforhim。Itwouldbegoodforhimtohavecompanions。"
　　"Wellitwon’tbeforlong。NextsummerI’lltakehimtoPetersburg，"saidNicholas。"Yes，Pierrealwayswasadreamerandalwayswillbe，"hecontinued，returningtothetalkinthestudywhichhadevidentlydisturbedhim。"Well，whatbusinessisitofminewhatgoesonthere—whetherArakcheevisbad，andallthat？
　　WhatbusinesswasitofminewhenImarriedandwassodeepindebtthatIwasthreatenedwithprison，andhadamotherwhocouldnotseeorunderstandit？Andthenthereareyouandthechildrenandouraffairs。IsitformyownpleasurethatIamatthefarmorintheofficefrommorningtonight？No，butIknowImustworktocomfortmymother，torepayyou，andnottoleavethechildrensuchbeggarsasIwas。"
　　CountessMarywantedtotellhimthatmandoesnotlivebybreadaloneandthatheattachedtoomuchimportancetothesematters。Butsheknewshemustnotsaythisandthatitwouldbeuselesstodoso。Sheonlytookhishandandkissedit。Hetookthisasasignofapprovalandaconfirmationofhisthoughts，andafterafewminutes’reflectioncontinuedtothinkaloud。
　　"Youknow，Mary，todayEliasMitrofanych"thiswashisoverseer
　　"camebackfromtheTambovestateandtoldmetheyarealreadyofferingeightythousandrublesfortheforest。"
　　AndwithaneagerfaceNicholasbegantospeakofthepossibilityofrepurchasingOtradnoebeforelong，andadded："AnothertenyearsoflifeandIshallleavethechildren……inanexcellentposition。"
　　CountessMarylistenedtoherhusbandandunderstoodallthathetoldher。Sheknewthatwhenhethoughtaloudinthiswayhewouldsometimesaskherwhathehadbeensaying，andbevexedifhenoticedthatshehadbeenthinkingaboutsomethingelse。Butshehadtoforceherselftoattend，forwhathewassayingdidnotinterestheratall。Shelookedathimanddidnotthink，butfelt，aboutsomethingdifferent。Shefeltasubmissivetenderloveforthismanwhowouldneverunderstandallthatsheunderstood，andthisseemedtomakeherloveforhimstillstrongerandaddedatouchofpassionatetenderness。Besidesthisfeelingwhichabsorbedheraltogetherandhinderedherfromfollowingthedetailsofherhusband’splans，thoughtsthathadnoconnectionwithwhathewassayingflittedthroughhermind。Shethoughtofhernephew。Herhusband’saccountoftheboy’sagitationwhilePierrewasspeakingstruckherforcibly，andvarioustraitsofhisgentle，sensitivecharacterrecurredtohermind；andwhilethinkingofhernephewshethoughtalsoofherownchildren。Shedidnotcomparethemwithhim，butcomparedherfeelingforthemwithherfeelingforhim，andfeltwithregretthattherewassomethinglackinginherfeelingforyoungNicholas。
　　Sometimesitseemedtoherthatthisdifferencearosefromthedifferenceintheirages，butshefeltherselftoblametowardhimandpromisedinherhearttodobetterandtoaccomplishtheimpossible—
　　inthislifetoloveherhusband，herchildren，littleNicholas，andallherneighbors，asChristlovedmankind。CountessMary’ssoulalwaysstrovetowardtheinfinite，theeternal，andtheabsolute，andcouldthereforeneverbeatpeace。Asternexpressionofthelofty，secretsufferingofasoulburdenedbythebodyappearedonherface。Nicholasgazedather。"OGod！Whatwillbecomeofusifshedies，asIalwaysfearwhenherfaceislikethat？"thoughthe，andplacinghimselfbeforetheiconhebegantosayhiseveningprayers。
　　EP1CH16
　　CHAPTERXVI
　　NatashaandPierre，leftalone，alsobegantotalkasonlyahusbandandwifecantalk，thatis，withextraordinaryclearnessandrapidity，understandingandexpressingeachother’sthoughtsinwayscontrarytoallrulesoflogic，withoutpremises，deductions，orconclusions，andinaquitepeculiarway。NatashawassousedtothiskindoftalkwithherhusbandthatforheritwasthesurestsignofsomethingbeingwrongbetweenthemifPierrefollowedalineoflogicalreasoning。Whenhebeganprovinganything，ortalkingargumentativelyandcalmlyandshe，ledonbyhisexample，begantodothesame，sheknewthattheywereonthevergeofaquarrel。
　　FromthemomenttheywerealoneandNatashacameuptohimwithwide—openhappyeyes，andquicklyseizinghisheadpressedittoherbosom，saying："Nowyouareallmine，mine！Youwon’tescape！"—fromthatmomentthisconversationbegan，contrarytoallthelawsoflogicandcontrarytothembecausequitedifferentsubjectsweretalkedaboutatoneandthesametime。Thissimultaneousdiscussionofmanytopicsdidnotpreventaclearunderstandingbutonthecontrarywasthesurestsignthattheyfullyunderstoodoneanother。
　　Justasinadreamwhenallisuncertain，unreasoning，andcontradictory，exceptthefeelingthatguidesthedream，sointhisintercoursecontrarytoalllawsofreason，thewordsthemselveswerenotconsecutiveandclearbutonlythefeelingthatpromptedthem。
　　NatashaspoketoPierreaboutherbrother’slifeanddoings，ofhowshehadsufferedandlackedlifeduringhisownabsence，andofhowshewasfonderthaneverofMary，andhowMarywasineverywaybetterthanherself。InsayingthisNatashawassincereinacknowledgingMary’ssuperiority，butatthesametimebysayingitshemadeademandonPierrethatheshould，allthesame，preferhertoMaryandtoallotherwomen，andthatnow，especiallyafterhavingseenmanywomeninPetersburg，heshouldtellhersoafresh。
　　Pierre，answeringNatasha’swords，toldherhowintolerableithadbeenforhimtomeetladiesatdinnersandballsinPetersburg。
　　"Ihavequitelosttheknackoftalkingtoladies，"hesaid。"Itwassimplydull。Besides，Iwasverybusy。"
　　Natashalookedintentlyathimandwenton：
　　"Maryissosplendid，"shesaid。"Howsheunderstandschildren！Itisasifshesawstraightintotheirsouls。Yesterday，forinstance，Mityawasnaughty……"
　　"Howlikehisfatherheis，"Pierreinterjected。
　　NatashaknewwhyhementionedMitya’slikenesstoNicholas：therecollectionofhisdisputewithhisbrother—in—lawwasunpleasantandhewantedtoknowwhatNatashathoughtofit。
　　"Nicholashastheweaknessofneveragreeingwithanythingnotgenerallyaccepted。ButIunderstandthatyouvaluewhatopensupafreshline，"saidshe，repeatingwordsPierrehadonceuttered。
　　"No，thechiefpointisthattoNicholasideasanddiscussionsareanamusement—almostapastime，"saidPierre。"Forinstance，heiscollectingalibraryandhasmadeitarulenottobuyanewbooktillhehasreadwhathehadalreadybought—SismondiandRousseauandMontesquieu，"headdedwithasmile。"YouknowhowmuchI……"hebegantosoftendownwhathehadsaid；butNatashainterruptedhimtoshowthatthiswasunnecessary。
　　"Soyousayideasareanamusementtohim……"
　　"Yes，andformenothingelseisserious。AllthetimeinPetersburgIsaweveryoneasinadream。WhenIamtakenupbyathought，allelseismereamusement。"
　　"Ah，I’msosorryIwasn’ttherewhenyoumetthechildren，"saidNatasha。"Whichwasmostdelighted？Lisa，I’msure。"
　　"Yes，"Pierrereplied，andwentonwithwhatwasinhismind。
　　"Nicholassaysweoughtnottothink。ButIcan’thelpit。Besides，whenIwasinPetersburgIfeltIcanthistoyouthatthewholeaffairwouldgotopieceswithoutme—everyonewaspullinghisownway。ButIsucceededinunitingthemall；andthenmyideaissoclearandsimple。Yousee，Idon’tsaythatweoughttoopposethisandthat。Wemaybemistaken。WhatIsayis：’Joinhands，youwholovetheright，andlettherebebutonebanner—thatofactivevirtue。’PrinceSergeyisafinefellowandclever。"
　　NatashawouldhavehadnodoubtastothegreatnessofPierre’sidea，butonethingdisconcertedher。"Canamansoimportantandnecessarytosocietybealsomyhusband？Howdidthishappen？"Shewishedtoexpressthisdoubttohim。"Nowwhocoulddecidewhetherheisreallyclevererthanalltheothers？"sheaskedherself，andpassedinreviewallthosewhomPierremostrespected。JudgingbywhathehadsaidtherewasnoonehehadrespectedsohighlyasPlatonKarataev。
　　"DoyouknowwhatIamthinkingabout？"sheasked。"AboutPlatonKarataev。Wouldhehaveapprovedofyounow，doyouthink？"
　　Pierrewasnotatallsurprisedatthisquestion。Heunderstoodhiswife’slineofthought。
　　"PlatonKarataev？"herepeated，andpondered，evidentlysincerelytryingtoimagineKarataev’sopiniononthesubject。"Hewouldnothaveunderstood……yetperhapshewould。"
　　"Iloveyouawfully！"Natashasuddenlysaid。"Awfully，awfully！"
　　"No，hewouldnothaveapproved，"saidPierre，afterreflection。
　　"Whathewouldhaveapprovedofisourfamilylife。Hewasalwayssoanxioustofindseemliness，happiness，andpeaceineverything，andIshouldhavebeenproudtolethimseeus。Therenow—youtalkofmyabsence，butyouwouldn’tbelievewhataspecialfeelingIhaveforyouafteraseparation……"
　　"Yes，Ishouldthink……"Natashabegan。
　　"No，it’snotthat。Ineverleaveofflovingyou。Andonecouldn’tlovemore，butthisissomethingspecial……Yes，ofcourse—"hedidnotfinishbecausetheireyesmeetingsaidtherest。
　　"Whatnonsenseitis，"Natashasuddenlyexclaimed，"abouthoneymoons，andthatthegreatesthappinessisatfirst！Onthecontrary，nowisthebestofall。Ifonlyyoudidnotgoaway！Doyourememberhowwequarreled？Anditwasalwaysmyfault。Alwaysmine。Andwhatwequarreledabout—Idon’tevenremember！"
　　"Alwaysaboutthesamething，"saidPierrewithasmile。"Jealo……"
　　"Don’tsayit！Ican’tbearit！"Natashacried，andhereyesglitteredcoldlyandvindictively。"Didyouseeher？"sheadded，afterapause。
　　"No，andifIhadIshouldn’thaverecognizedher。"
　　Theyweresilentforawhile。
　　"Oh，doyouknow？WhileyouweretalkinginthestudyIwaslookingatyou，"Natashabegan，evidentlyanxioustodispersethecloudthathadcomeoverthem。"Youareaslikehimastwopeas—
　　liketheboy。"Shemeantherlittleson。"Oh，it’stimetogotohim……Themilk’scome……ButI’msorrytoleaveyou。"
　　Theyweresilentforafewseconds。Thensuddenlyturningtooneanotheratthesametimetheybothbegantospeak。Pierrebeganwithself—satisfactionandenthusiasm，Natashawithaquiet，happysmile。
　　Havinginterruptedoneanothertheybothstoppedtolettheothercontinue。
　　"No。Whatdidyousay？Goon，goon。"
　　"No，yougoon，Iwastalkingnonsense，"saidNatasha。
　　Pierrefinishedwhathehadbegun。ItwasthesequeltohiscomplacentreflectionsonhissuccessinPetersburg。AtthatmomentitseemedtohimthathewaschosentogiveanewdirectiontothewholeofRussiansocietyandtothewholeworld。
　　"Ionlywishedtosaythatideasthathavegreatresultsarealwayssimpleones。Mywholeideaisthatifviciouspeopleareunitedandconstituteapower，thenhonestfolkmustdothesame。Nowthat’ssimpleenough。"
　　"Yes。"
　　"Andwhatwereyougoingtosay？"
　　"I？Onlynonsense。"
　　"Butallthesame？"
　　"Ohnothing，onlyatrifle，"saidNatasha，smilinglystillmorebrightly。"IonlywantedtotellyouaboutPetya：todaynursewascomingtotakehimfromme，andhelaughed，shuthiseyes，andclungtome。I’msurehethoughthewashiding。Awfullysweet！There，nowhe’scrying。Well，good—by！"andshelefttheroom。
　　MeanwhiledownstairsinyoungNicholasBolkonski’sbedroomalittlelampwasburningasusual。Theboywasafraidofthedarkandtheycouldnotcurehimofit。DessallessleptproppeduponfourpillowsandhisRomannoseemittedsoundsofrhythmicsnoring。
　　LittleNicholas，whohadjustwakedupinacoldperspiration，satupinbedandgazedbeforehimwithwide—openeyes。Hehadawakedfromaterribledream。HehaddreamedthatheandUnclePierre，wearinghelmetssuchasweredepictedinhisPlutarch，wereleadingahugearmy。ThearmywasmadeupofwhiteslantinglinesthatfilledtheairlikethecobwebsthatfloataboutinautumnandwhichDessallescalledlesfilsdelaVierge。InfrontwasGlory，whichwassimilartothosethreadsbutratherthicker。HeandPierrewerebornealonglightlyandjoyously，nearerandnearertotheirgoal。Suddenlythethreadsthatmovedthembegantoslackenandbecomeentangledanditgrewdifficulttomove。AndUncleNicholasstoodbeforetheminasternandthreateningattitude。
　　"Haveyoudonethis？"hesaid，pointingtosomebrokensealingwaxandpens。"Ilovedyou，butIhaveordersfromArakcheevandwillkillthefirstofyouwhomovesforward。"LittleNicholasturnedtolookatPierrebutPierrewasnolongerthere。Inhisplacewashisfather—
　　PrinceAndrew—andhisfatherhadneithershapenorform，butheexisted，andwhenlittleNicholasperceivedhimhegrewfaintwithlove：hefelthimselfpowerless，limp，andformless。Hisfathercaressedandpitiedhim。ButUncleNicholascamenearerandnearertothem。TerrorseizedyoungNicholasandheawoke。
　　"Myfather！"hethought。ThoughthereweretwogoodportraitsofPrinceAndrewinthehouse，Nicholasneverimaginedhiminhumanform。"Myfatherhasbeenwithmeandcaressedme。HeapprovedofmeandofUnclePierre。Whateverhemaytellme，Iwilldoit。
　　MuciusScaevolaburnedhishand。Whyshouldnotthesamesortofthinghappentome？Iknowtheywantmetolearn。AndIwilllearn。ButsomedayIshallhavefinishedlearning，andthenIwilldosomething。IonlyprayGodthatsomethingmayhappentomesuchashappenedtoPlutarch’smen，andIwillactastheydid。Iwilldobetter。Everyoneshallknowme，loveme，andbedelightedwithme！"
　　Andsuddenlyhisbosomheavedwithsobsandhebegantocry。
　　"Areyouill？"heheardDessalles’voiceasking。
　　"No，"answeredNicholas，andlaybackonhispillow。
　　"HeisgoodandkindandIamfondofhim！"hethoughtofDessalles。
　　"ButUnclePierre！Oh，whatawonderfulmanheis！Andmyfather？
　　Oh，Father，Father！Yes，Iwilldosomethingwithwhichevenhewouldbesatisfied……"SECONDEPILOGUE
　　CHAPTERI
　　Historyisthelifeofnationsandofhumanity。Toseizeandput
　　intowords，todescribedirectlythelifeofhumanityorevenofa
　　singlenation，appearsimpossible。
　　Theancienthistoriansallemployedoneandthesamemethodto
　　describeandseizetheapparentlyelusive—thelifeofapeople。
　　Theydescribedtheactivityofindividualswhoruledthepeople，and
　　regardedtheactivityofthosemenasrepresentingtheactivityofthe
　　wholenation。
　　Thequestion：howdidindividualsmakenationsactastheywished
　　andbywhatwasthewilloftheseindividualsthemselvesguided？the
　　ancientsmetbyrecognizingadivinitywhichsubjectedthenations
　　tothewillofachosenman，andguidedthewillofthatchosenmanso
　　astoaccomplishendsthatwerepredestined。
　　Fortheancientsthesequestionsweresolvedbyabeliefinthe
　　directparticipationoftheDeityinhumanaffairs。
　　Modernhistory，intheory，rejectsboththeseprinciples。
　　Itwouldseemthathavingrejectedthebeliefoftheancientsin
　　man’ssubjectiontotheDeityandinapredeterminedaimtoward
　　whichnationsareled，modernhistoryshouldstudynotthe
　　manifestationsofpowerbutthecausesthatproduceit。Butmodern
　　historyhasnotdonethis。Havingintheoryrejectedtheviewheld
　　bytheancients，itstillfollowstheminpractice。
　　Insteadofmenendowedwithdivineauthorityanddirectlyguided
　　bythewillofGod，modernhistoryhasgivenuseitherheroes
　　endowedwithextraordinary，superhumancapacities，orsimplymenof
　　veryvariouskinds，frommonarchstojournalists，wholeadthemasses。
　　InsteadoftheformerdivinelyappointedaimsoftheJewish，Greek，or
　　Romannations，whichancienthistoriansregardedasrepresentingthe
　　progressofhumanity，modernhistoryhaspostulateditsownaims—
　　thewelfareoftheFrench，German，orEnglishpeople，or，inits
　　highestabstraction，thewelfareandcivilizationofhumanityin
　　general，bywhichisusuallymeantthatofthepeoplesoccupyinga
　　smallnorthwesterlyportionofalargecontinent。
　　Modernhistoryhasrejectedthebeliefsoftheancientswithout
　　replacingthembyanewconception，andthelogicofthesituationhas
　　obligedthehistorians，aftertheyhadapparentlyrejectedthe
　　divineauthorityofthekingsandthe"fate"oftheancients，toreach
　　thesameconclusionbyanotherroad，thatis，torecognize1nations
　　guidedbyindividualmen，and2theexistenceofaknownaimto
　　whichthesenationsandhumanityatlargearetending。
　　AtthebasisoftheworksofallthemodernhistoriansfromGibbon
　　toBuckle，despitetheirseemingdisagreementsandtheapparent
　　noveltyoftheiroutlooks，liethosetwoold，unavoidableassumptions。
　　Inthefirstplacethehistoriandescribestheactivityof
　　individualswhoinhisopinionhavedirectedhumanityonehistorian
　　considersonlymonarchs，generals，andministersasbeingsuchmen，
　　whileanotherincludesalsoorators，learnedmen，reformers，
　　philosophers，andpoets。Secondly，itisassumedthatthegoaltoward
　　whichhumanityisbeingledisknowntothehistorians：tooneofthem
　　thisgoalisthegreatnessoftheRoman，Spanish，orFrenchrealm；
　　toanotheritisliberty，equality，andacertainkindofcivilization
　　ofasmallcorneroftheworldcalledEurope。
　　In1789afermentarisesinParis；itgrows，spreads，andis
　　expressedbyamovementofpeoplesfromwesttoeast。Severaltimesit
　　moveseastwardandcollideswithacountermovementfromtheeast
　　westward。In1812itreachesitsextremelimit，Moscow，andthen，with
　　remarkablesymmetry，acountermovementoccursfromeasttowest，
　　attractingtoit，asthefirstmovementhaddone，thenationsof
　　middleEurope。Thecountermovementreachesthestartingpointof
　　thefirstmovementinthewest—Paris—andsubsides。
　　Duringthattwenty—yearperiodanimmensenumberoffieldswereleft
　　untilled，houseswereburned，tradechangeditsdirection，millionsof
　　menmigrated，wereimpoverished，orwereenriched，andmillionsof
　　Christianmenprofessingthelawofloveoftheirfellowsslewone
　　another。
　　Whatdoesallthismean？Whydidithappen？Whatmadethosepeople
　　burnhousesandslaytheirfellowmen？Whatwerethecausesofthese
　　events？Whatforcemademenactso？Thesearetheinstinctive，
　　plain，andmostlegitimatequestionshumanityasksitselfwhenit
　　encountersthemonumentsandtraditionofthatperiod。
　　Forareplytothesequestionsthecommonsenseofmankindturns
　　tothescienceofhistory，whoseaimistoenablenationsandhumanity
　　toknowthemselves。
　　Ifhistoryhadretainedtheconceptionoftheancientsitwouldhave
　　saidthatGod，torewardorpunishhispeople，gaveNapoleonpowerand
　　directedhiswilltothefulfillmentofthedivineends，andthat
　　reply，wouldhavebeenclearandcomplete。Onemightbelieveor
　　disbelieveinthedivinesignificanceofNapoleon，butforanyone
　　believinginittherewouldhavebeennothingunintelligibleinthe
　　historyofthatperiod，norwouldtherehavebeenanycontradictions。
　　Butmodernhistorycannotgivethatreply。Sciencedoesnotadmit
　　theconceptionoftheancientsastothedirectparticipationofthe
　　Deityinhumanaffairs，andthereforehistoryoughttogiveother
　　answers。
　　Modernhistoryreplyingtothesequestionssays：youwanttoknow
　　whatthismovementmeans，whatcausedit，andwhatforceproduced
　　theseevents？Thenlisten：
　　"LouisXIVwasaveryproudandself—confidentman；hehadsuch
　　andsuchmistressesandsuchandsuchministersandheruledFrance
　　badly。HisdescendantswereweakmenandtheytooruledFrance
　　badly。Andtheyhadsuchandsuchfavoritesandsuchandsuch
　　mistresses。Moreover，certainmenwrotesomebooksatthattime。At
　　theendoftheeighteenthcenturytherewereacoupleofdozenmen
　　inPariswhobegantotalkaboutallmenbeingfreeandequal。This
　　causedpeoplealloverFrancetobegintoslashatanddrownone
　　another。Theykilledthekingandmanyotherpeople。Atthattime
　　therewasinFranceamanofgenius—Napoleon。Heconquered
　　everybodyeverywhere—thatis，hekilledmanypeoplebecausehewas
　　agreatgenius。AndforsomereasonhewenttokillAfricans，and
　　killedthemsowellandwassocunningandwisethatwhenhe
　　returnedtoFranceheorderedeverybodytoobeyhim，andtheyall
　　obeyedhim。HavingbecomeanEmperorheagainwentouttokill
　　peopleinItaly，Austria，andPrussia。Andtheretoohekilledagreat
　　many。InRussiatherewasanEmperor，Alexander，whodecidedto
　　restoreorderinEuropeandthereforefoughtagainstNapoleon。In1807
　　hesuddenlymadefriendswithhim，butin1811theyagainquarreled
　　andagainbegankillingmanypeople。Napoleonledsixhundredthousand
　　menintoRussiaandcapturedMoscow；thenhesuddenlyranawayfrom
　　Moscow，andtheEmperorAlexander，helpedbytheadviceofSteinand
　　others，unitedEuropetoarmagainstthedisturberofitspeace。All
　　Napoleon’salliessuddenlybecamehisenemiesandtheirforces
　　advancedagainstthefreshforcesheraised。TheAlliesdefeated
　　Napoleon，enteredParis，forcedNapoleontoabdicate，andsenthim
　　totheislandofElba，notdeprivinghimofthetitleofEmperorand
　　showinghimeveryrespect，thoughfiveyearsbeforeandoneyearlater
　　theyallregardedhimasanoutlawandabrigand。ThenLouisXVIII，
　　whotillthenhadbeenthelaughingstockbothoftheFrenchandthe
　　Allies，begantoreign。AndNapoleon，sheddingtearsbeforehisOld
　　Guards，renouncedthethroneandwentintoexile。Thentheskillful
　　statesmenanddiplomatistsespeciallyTalleyrand，whomanagedto
　　sitdowninaparticularchairbeforeanyoneelseandtherebyextended
　　thefrontiersofFrancetalkedinViennaandbytheseconversations
　　madethenationshappyorunhappy。Suddenlythediplomatistsand
　　monarchsnearlyquarreledandwereonthepointofagainordering
　　theirarmiestokilloneanother，butjustthenNapoleonarrivedin
　　Francewithabattalion，andtheFrench，whohadbeenhatinghim，
　　immediatelyallsubmittedtohim。ButtheAlliedmonarchswereangry
　　atthisandwenttofighttheFrenchoncemore。Andtheydefeated
　　thegeniusNapoleonand，suddenlyrecognizinghimasabrigand，sent
　　himtotheislandofSt。Helena。Andtheexile，separatedfromthe
　　belovedFrancesodeartohisheart，diedalingeringdeathonthat
　　rockandbequeathedhisgreatdeedstoposterity。ButinEuropea
　　reactionoccurredandthesovereignsonceagainallbegantooppress
　　theirsubjects。"
　　Itwouldbeamistaketothinkthatthisisironic—acaricature
　　ofthehistoricalaccounts。Onthecontraryitisaverymild
　　expressionofthecontradictoryreplies，notmeetingthequestions，
　　whichallthehistoriansgive，fromthecompilersofmemoirsandthe
　　historiesofseparatestatestothewritersofgeneralhistoriesand
　　thenewhistoriesofthecultureofthatperiod。
　　Thestrangenessandabsurdityoftheserepliesarisefromthefact
　　thatmodernhistory，likeadeafman，answersquestionsnoonehas
　　asked。
　　Ifthepurposeofhistorybetogiveadescriptionofthemovement
　　ofhumanityandofthepeoples，thefirstquestion—intheabsence
　　ofareplytowhichalltherestwillbeincomprehensible—is：whatis
　　thepowerthatmovespeoples？Tothis，modernhistorylaboriously
　　replieseitherthatNapoleonwasagreatgenius，orthatLouisXIVwas
　　veryproud，orthatcertainwriterswrotecertainbooks。
　　Allthatmaybesoandmankindisreadytoagreewithit，butit
　　isnotwhatwasasked。Allthatwouldbeinterestingifwe
　　recognizedadivinepowerbasedonitselfandalwaysconsistently
　　directingitsnationsthroughNapoleons，Louis—es，andwriters；butwe
　　donotacknowledgesuchapower，andthereforebeforespeakingabout
　　Napoleons，Louis—es，andauthors，weoughttobeshownthe
　　connectionexistingbetweenthesemenandthemovementofthenations。
　　Ifinsteadofadivinepowersomeotherforcehasappeared，it
　　shouldbeexplainedinwhatthisnewforceconsists，forthewhole
　　interestofhistoryliespreciselyinthatforce。
　　Historyseemstoassumethatthisforceisself—evidentandknownto
　　everyone。Butinspiteofeverydesiretoregarditasknown，anyone
　　readingmanyhistoricalworkscannothelpdoubtingwhetherthisnew
　　force，sovariouslyunderstoodbythehistoriansthemselves，isreally
　　quitewellknowntoeverybody。
　　EP2CH2
　　CHAPTERII
　　Whatforcemovesthenations？
　　Biographicalhistoriansandhistoriansofseparatenations
　　understandthisforceasapowerinherentinheroesandrulers。In
　　theirnarrationeventsoccursolelybythewillofaNapoleon，and
　　Alexander，oringeneralofthepersonstheydescribe。Theanswers
　　givenbythiskindofhistoriantothequestionofwhatforcecauses
　　eventstohappenaresatisfactoryonlyaslongasthereisbutone
　　historiantoeachevent。Assoonashistoriansofdifferent
　　nationalitiesandtendenciesbegintodescribethesameevent，the
　　repliestheygiveimmediatelyloseallmeaning，forthisforceis
　　understoodbythemallnotonlydifferentlybutofteninquite
　　contradictoryways。Onehistoriansaysthataneventwasproducedby
　　Napoleon’spower，anotherthatitwasproducedbyAlexander’s，athird
　　thatitwasduetothepowerofsomeotherperson。Besidesthis，
　　historiansofthatkindcontradicteachotherevenintheir
　　statementastotheforceonwhichtheauthorityofsomeparticular
　　personwasbased。Thiers，aBonapartist，saysthatNapoleon’spower
　　wasbasedonhisvirtueandgenius。Lanfrey，aRepublican，saysitwas
　　basedonhistrickeryanddeceptionofthepeople。Sothehistorians
　　ofthisclass，bymutuallydestroyingoneanother’spositions，destroy
　　theunderstandingoftheforcewhichproducesevents，andfurnishno
　　replytohistory’sessentialquestion。
　　Writersofuniversalhistorywhodealwithallthenationsseemto
　　recognizehowerroneousisthespecialisthistorians’viewofthe
　　forcewhichproducesevents。Theydonotrecognizeitasapower
　　inherentinheroesandrulers，butastheresultantofa
　　multiplicityofvariouslydirectedforces。Indescribingawaror
　　thesubjugationofapeople，ageneralhistorianlooksforthecause
　　oftheeventnotinthepowerofoneman，butintheinteractionof
　　manypersonsconnectedwiththeevent。
　　Accordingtothisviewthepowerofhistoricalpersonages，
　　representedastheproductofmanyforces，cannolonger，itwould
　　seem，beregardedasaforcethatitselfproducesevents。Yetin
　　mostcasesuniversalhistoriansstillemploytheconceptionofpower
　　asaforcethatitselfproducesevents，andtreatitastheircause。
　　Intheirexposition，anhistoriccharacterisfirsttheproductofhis
　　time，andhispoweronlytheresultantofvariousforces，andthenhis
　　powerisitselfaforceproducingevents。Gervinus，Schlosser，and
　　others，forinstance，atonetimeproveNapoleontobeaproductof
　　theRevolution，oftheideasof1789andsoforth，andatanother
　　plainlysaythatthecampaignof1812andotherthingstheydonot
　　likeweresimplytheproductofNapoleon’smisdirectedwill，and
　　thattheveryideasof1789werearrestedintheirdevelopmentby
　　Napoleon’scaprice。TheideasoftheRevolutionandthegeneraltemper
　　oftheageproducedNapoleon’spower。ButNapoleon’spower
　　suppressedtheideasoftheRevolutionandthegeneraltemperofthe
　　age。
　　Thiscuriouscontradictionisnotaccidental。Notonlydoesitoccur
　　ateverystep，buttheuniversalhistorians’accountsareallmade
　　upofachainofsuchcontradictions。Thiscontradictionoccurs
　　becauseafterenteringthefieldofanalysistheuniversal
　　historiansstophalfway。
　　Tofindcomponentforcesequaltothecompositeorresultant
　　force，thesumofthecomponentsmustequaltheresultant。This
　　conditionisneverobservedbytheuniversalhistorians，andsoto
　　explaintheresultantforcestheyareobligedtoadmit，inadditionto
　　theinsufficientcomponents，anotherunexplainedforceaffectingthe
　　resultantaction。
　　Specialisthistoriansdescribingthecampaignof1813orthe
　　restorationoftheBourbonsplainlyassertthattheseeventswere
　　producedbythewillofAlexander。Buttheuniversalhistorian
　　Gervinus，refutingthisopinionofthespecialisthistorian，tries
　　toprovethatthecampaignof1813andtherestorationoftheBourbons
　　wereduetootherthingsbesideAlexander’swill—suchastheactivity
　　ofStein，Metternich，MadamedeStael，Talleyrand，Fichte
　　Chateaubriand，andothers。Thehistorianevidentlydecomposes
　　Alexander’spowerintothecomponents：Talleyrand，Chateaubriand，
　　andtherest—butthesumofthecomponents，thatis，theinteractions
　　ofChateaubriand，Talleyrand，MadamedeStael，andtheothers，
　　evidentlydoesnotequaltheresultant，namelythephenomenonof
　　millionsofFrenchmensubmittingtotheBourbons。That
　　Chateaubriand，MadamedeStael，andothersspokecertainwordsto
　　oneanotheronlyaffectedtheirmutualrelationsbutdoesnot
　　accountforthesubmissionofmillions。Andthereforetoexplainhow
　　fromtheserelationsoftheirsthesubmissionofmillionsofpeople
　　resulted—thatis，howcomponentforcesequaltooneAgavea
　　resultantequaltoathousandtimesA—thehistorianisagain
　　obligedtofallbackonpower—theforcehehaddenied—andto
　　recognizeitastheresultantoftheforces，thatis，hehasto
　　admitanunexplainedforceactingontheresultant。Andthatisjust
　　whattheuniversalhistoriansdo，andconsequentlytheynotonly
　　contradictthespecialisthistoriansbutcontradictthemselves。
　　Peasantshavingnoclearideaofthecauseofrain，say，according
　　towhethertheywantrainorfineweather："Thewindhasblownthe
　　cloudsaway，"or，"Thewindhasbroughtuptheclouds。"Andinthe
　　samewaytheuniversalhistorianssometimes，whenitpleasesthem
　　andfitsinwiththeirtheory，saythatpoweristheresultofevents，
　　andsometimes，whentheywanttoprovesomethingelse，saythat
　　powerproducesevents。
　　Athirdclassofhistorians—theso—calledhistoriansofculture—
　　followingthepathlaiddownbytheuniversalhistorianswhosometimes
　　acceptwritersandladiesasforcesproducingevents—againtake
　　thatforcetobesomethingquitedifferent。Theyseeitinwhatis
　　calledculture—inmentalactivity。
　　Thehistoriansofculturearequiteconsistentinregardtotheir
　　progenitors，thewritersofuniversalhistories，forifhistorical
　　eventsmaybeexplainedbythefactthatcertainpersonstreatedone
　　anotherinsuchandsuchways，whynotexplainthembythefactthat
　　suchandsuchpeoplewrotesuchandsuchbooks？Oftheimmense
　　numberofindicationsaccompanyingeveryvitalphenomenon，these
　　historiansselecttheindicationofintellectualactivityandsaythat
　　thisindicationisthecause。Butdespitetheirendeavorstoprove
　　thatthecauseofeventsliesinintellectualactivity，onlybya
　　greatstretchcanoneadmitthatthereisanyconnectionbetween
　　intellectualactivityandthemovementofpeoples，andinnocase
　　canoneadmitthatintellectualactivitycontrolspeople’sactions，
　　forthatviewisnotconfirmedbysuchfactsastheverycruelmurders
　　oftheFrenchRevolutionresultingfromthedoctrineoftheequality
　　ofman，ortheverycruelwarsandexecutionsresultingfromthe
　　preachingoflove。
　　Butevenadmittingascorrectallthecunninglydevisedarguments
　　withwhichthesehistoriesarefilled—admittingthatnationsare
　　governedbysomeundefinedforcecalledanidea—history’sessential
　　questionstillremainsunanswered，andtotheformerpowerofmonarchs
　　andtotheinfluenceofadvisersandotherpeopleintroducedbythe
　　universalhistorians，another，newerforce—theidea—isadded，the
　　connectionofwhichwiththemassesneedsexplanation。Itis
　　possibletounderstandthatNapoleonhadpowerandsoeventsoccurred；
　　withsomeeffortonemayevenconceivethatNapoleontogetherwith
　　otherinfluenceswasthecauseofanevent；buthowabook，LeContrat
　　social，hadtheeffectofmakingFrenchmenbegintodrownone
　　anothercannotbeunderstoodwithoutanexplanationofthecausal
　　nexusofthisnewforcewiththeevent。
　　Undoubtedlysomerelationexistsbetweenallwholive
　　contemporaneously，andsoitispossibletofindsomeconnection
　　betweentheintellectualactivityofmenandtheirhistorical
　　movements，justassuchaconnectionmaybefoundbetweenthe
　　movementsofhumanityandcommerce，handicraft，gardening，oranything
　　elseyouplease。Butwhyintellectualactivityisconsideredbythe
　　historiansofculturetobethecauseorexpressionofthewhole
　　historicalmovementishardtounderstand。Onlythefollowing
　　considerationscanhaveledthehistorianstosuchaconclusion：1
　　thathistoryiswrittenbylearnedmen，andsoitisnaturaland
　　agreeableforthemtothinkthattheactivityoftheirclass
　　suppliesthebasisofthemovementofallhumanity，justasa
　　similarbeliefisnaturalandagreeabletotraders，agriculturists，
　　andsoldiersiftheydonotexpressit，thatismerelybecause
　　tradersandsoldiersdonotwritehistory，and2thatspiritual
　　activity，enlightenment，civilization，culture，ideas，areall
　　indistinct，indefiniteconceptionsunderwhosebanneritisvery
　　easytousewordshavingastilllessdefinitemeaning，andwhich
　　canthereforebereadilyintroducedintoanytheory。
　　Butnottospeakoftheintrinsicqualityofhistoriesofthis
　　kindwhichmaypossiblyevenbeofusetosomeoneforsomething
　　thehistoriesofculture，towhichallgeneralhistoriestendmoreand
　　moretoapproximate，aresignificantfromthefactthatafter
　　seriouslyandminutelyexaminingvariousreligious，philosophic，and
　　politicaldoctrinesascausesofevents，assoonastheyhaveto
　　describeanactualhistoriceventsuchasthecampaignof1812for
　　instance，theyinvoluntarilydescribeitasresultingfromanexercise
　　ofpower—andsayplainlythatthatwastheresultofNapoleon’swill。
　　Speakingso，thehistoriansofcultureinvoluntarilycontradict
　　themselves，andshowthatthenewforcetheyhavedeviseddoesnot
　　accountforwhathappensinhistory，andthathistorycanonlybe
　　explainedbyintroducingapowerwhichtheyapparentlydonot
　　recognize。
　　EP2CH3
　　CHAPTERIII
　　Alocomotiveismoving。Someoneasks："Whatmovesit？"Apeasant
　　saysthedevilmovesit。Anothermansaysthelocomotivemovesbecause
　　itswheelsgoround。Athirdassertsthatthecauseofitsmovement
　　liesinthesmokewhichthewindcarriesaway。
　　Thepeasantisirrefutable。Hehasdevisedacompleteexplanation。
　　Torefutehimsomeonewouldhavetoprovetohimthatthereisno
　　devil，oranotherpeasantwouldhavetoexplaintohimthatitis
　　notthedevilbutaGerman，whomovesthelocomotive。Onlythen，as
　　aresultofthecontradiction，willtheyseethattheyarebothwrong。
　　Butthemanwhosaysthatthemovementofthewheelsisthecause
　　refuteshimself，forhavingoncebeguntoanalyzeheoughttogoon
　　andexplainfurtherwhythewheelsgoround；andtillhehasreached
　　theultimatecauseofthemovementofthelocomotiveinthepressure
　　ofsteamintheboiler，hehasnorighttostopinhissearchfor
　　thecause。Themanwhoexplainsthemovementofthelocomotiveby
　　thesmokethatiscarriedbackhasnoticedthatthewheelsdonot
　　supplyanexplanationandhastakenthefirstsignthatoccursto
　　himandinhisturnhasofferedthatasanexplanation。
　　Theonlyconceptionthatcanexplainthemovementofthe
　　locomotiveisthatofaforcecommensuratewiththemovementobserved。
　　Theonlyconceptionthatcanexplainthemovementofthepeoples
　　isthatofsomeforcecommensuratewiththewholemovementofthe
　　peoples。
　　Yettosupplythisconceptionvarioushistorianstakeforcesof
　　differentkinds，allofwhichareincommensuratewiththemovement
　　observed。Someseeitasaforcedirectlyinherentinheroes，asthe
　　peasantseesthedevilinthelocomotive；othersasaforce
　　resultingfromseveralotherforces，likethemovementofthe
　　wheels；othersagainasanintellectualinfluence，likethesmokethat
　　isblownaway。
　　Solongashistoriesarewrittenofseparateindividuals，whether
　　Caesars，Alexanders，Luthers，orVoltaires，andnotthehistoriesof
　　all，absolutelyallthosewhotakepartinanevent，itisquite
　　impossibletodescribethemovementofhumanitywithouttheconception
　　ofaforcecompellingmentodirecttheiractivitytowardacertain
　　end。Andtheonlysuchconceptionknowntohistoriansisthatof
　　power。
　　Thisconceptionistheonehandlebymeansofwhichthematerial
　　ofhistory，asatpresentexpounded，canbedealtwith，andanyonewho
　　breaksthathandleoff，asBuckledid，withoutfindingsomeother
　　methodoftreatinghistoricalmaterial，merelydepriveshimselfofthe
　　onepossiblewayofdealingwithit。Thenecessityoftheconception
　　ofpowerasanexplanationofhistoricaleventsisbestdemonstrated
　　bytheuniversalhistoriansandhistoriansofculturethemselves，
　　fortheyprofessedlyrejectthatconceptionbutinevitablyhave
　　recoursetoitateverystep。
　　Indealingwithhumanity’sinquiry，thescienceofhistoryuptonow
　　islikemoneyincirculation—papermoneyandcoin。Thebiographies
　　andspecialnationalhistoriesarelikepapermoney。Theycanbe
　　usedandcancirculateandfulfilltheirpurposewithoutharmto
　　anyoneandevenadvantageously，aslongasnooneaskswhatisthe
　　securitybehindthem。Youneedonlyforgettoaskhowthewillof
　　heroesproducesevents，andsuchhistoriesasThiers’willbe
　　interestingandinstructiveandmayperhapsevenpossessatingeof
　　poetry。Butjustasdoubtsoftherealvalueofpapermoneyarise
　　eitherbecause，beingeasytomake，toomuchofitgetsmadeor
　　becausepeopletrytoexchangeitforgold，soalsodoubts
　　concerningtherealvalueofsuchhistoriesariseeitherbecausetoo
　　manyofthemarewrittenorbecauseinhissimplicityofheartsomeone
　　inquires：bywhatforcedidNapoleondothis？—thatis，wantsto
　　exchangethecurrentpapermoneyfortherealgoldofactual
　　comprehension。
　　Thewritersofuniversalhistoriesandofthehistoryofcultureare
　　likepeoplewho，recognizingthedefectsofpapermoney，decideto
　　substituteforitmoneymadeofmetalthathasnotthespecific
　　gravityofgold。Itmayindeedmakejinglingcoin，butwilldonomore
　　thanthat。Papermoneymaydeceivetheignorant，butnobodyis
　　deceivedbytokensofbasemetalthathavenovaluebutmerelyjingle。
　　Asgoldisgoldonlyifitisserviceablenotmerelyforexchange
　　butalsoforuse，souniversalhistorianswillbevaluableonlywhen
　　theycanreplytohistory’sessentialquestion：whatispower？The
　　universalhistoriansgivecontradictoryrepliestothatquestion，
　　whilethehistoriansofcultureevadeitandanswersomethingquite
　　different。Andascountersofimitationgoldcanbeusedonlyamong
　　agroupofpeoplewhoagreetoacceptthemasgold，oramongthosewho
　　donotknowthenatureofgold，souniversalhistoriansandhistorians
　　ofculture，notansweringhumanity’sessentialquestion，serveas
　　currencyforsomepurposesoftheirown，onlyinuniversitiesand
　　amongthemassofreaderswhohaveatasteforwhattheycall"serious
　　reading。"
　　EP2CH4
　　CHAPTERIV
　　Havingabandonedtheconceptionoftheancientsastothedivine
　　subjectionofthewillofanationtosomechosenmanandthe
　　subjectionofthatman’swilltotheDeity，historycannotwithout
　　contradictionstakeasinglesteptillithaschosenoneoftwo
　　things：eitherareturntotheformerbeliefinthedirect
　　interventionoftheDeityinhumanaffairsoradefiniteexplanation
　　ofthemeaningoftheforceproducinghistoricaleventsandtermed
　　"power。"
　　Areturntothefirstisimpossible，thebeliefhasbeen
　　destroyed；andsoitisessentialtoexplainwhatismeantbypower。
　　Napoleonorderedanarmytoberaisedandgotowar。Weareso
　　accustomedtothatideaandhavebecomesousedtoitthatthe
　　question：whydidsixhundredthousandmengotofightwhenNapoleon
　　utteredcertainwords，seemstoussenseless。Hehadthepowerand
　　sowhatheorderedwasdone。
　　Thisreplyisquitesatisfactoryifwebelievethatthepowerwas
　　givenhimbyGod。Butassoonaswedonotadmitthat，itbecomes
　　essentialtodeterminewhatisthispowerofonemanoverothers。
　　Itcannotbethedirectphysicalpowerofastrongmanoveraweak
　　one—adominationbasedontheapplicationorthreatofphysical
　　force，likethepowerofHercules；norcanitbebasedontheeffect
　　ofmoralforce，asintheirsimplicitysomehistoriansthinkwhosay
　　thattheleadingfiguresinhistoryareheroes，thatis，mengifted
　　withaspecialstrengthofsoulandmindcalledgenius。Thispower
　　cannotbebasedonthepredominanceofmoralstrength，for，notto
　　mentionheroessuchasNapoleonaboutwhosemoralqualitiesopinions
　　differwidely，historyshowsusthatneitheraLouisXInora
　　Metternich，whoruledovermillionsofpeople，hadanyparticular
　　moralqualities，butonthecontraryweregenerallymorallyweaker
　　thananyofthemillionstheyruledover。
　　Ifthesourceofpowerliesneitherinthephysicalnorinthemoral
　　qualitiesofhimwhopossessesit，itmustevidentlybelookedfor
　　elsewhere—intherelationtothepeopleofthemanwhowieldsthe
　　power。
　　Andthatishowpowerisunderstoodbythescienceofjurisprudence，
　　thatexchangebankofhistorywhichofferstoexchangehistory’s
　　understandingofpowerfortruegold。
　　Poweristhecollectivewillofthepeopletransferred，byexpressed
　　ortacitconsent，totheirchosenrulers。
　　Inthedomainofjurisprudence，whichconsistsofdiscussionsofhow
　　astateandpowermightbearrangedwereitpossibleforallthatto
　　bearranged，itisallveryclear；butwhenappliedtohistorythat
　　definitionofpowerneedsexplanation。
　　Thescienceofjurisprudenceregardsthestateandpowerasthe
　　ancientsregardedfire—namely，assomethingexistingabsolutely。
　　Butforhistory，thestateandpoweraremerelyphenomena，justasfor
　　modernphysicsfireisnotanelementbutaphenomenon。
　　Fromthisfundamentaldifferencebetweentheviewheldbyhistory
　　andthatheldbyjurisprudence，itfollowsthatjurisprudencecantell
　　minutelyhowinitsopinionpowershouldbeconstitutedandwhat
　　power—existingimmutablyoutsidetime—is，buttohistory’squestions
　　aboutthemeaningofthemutationsofpowerintimeitcananswer
　　nothing。
　　Ifpowerbethecollectivewillofthepeopletransferredtotheir
　　ruler，wasPugachevarepresentativeofthewillofthepeople？If
　　not，thenwhywasNapoleonI？WhywasNapoleonIIIacriminalwhen
　　hewastakenprisoneratBoulogne，andwhy，lateron，werethose
　　criminalswhomhearrested？
　　Dopalacerevolutions—inwhichsometimesonlytwoorthreepeople
　　takepart—transferthewillofthepeopletoanewruler？In
　　internationalrelations，isthewillofthepeoplealsotransferredto
　　theirconqueror？WasthewilloftheConfederationoftheRhine
　　transferredtoNapoleonin1806？WasthewilloftheRussianpeople
　　transferredtoNapoleonin1809，whenourarmyinalliancewiththe
　　FrenchwenttofighttheAustrians？
　　Tothesequestionsthreeanswersarepossible：
　　Eithertoassume1thatthewillofthepeopleisalways
　　unconditionallytransferredtotherulerorrulerstheyhavechosen，
　　andthatthereforeeveryemergenceofanewpower，everystruggle
　　againstthepoweronceappointed，shouldbeabsolutelyregardedas
　　aninfringementoftherealpower；or2thatthewillofthe
　　peopleistransferredtotherulersconditionally，underdefinite
　　andknownconditions，andtoshowthatalllimitations，conflicts，and
　　evendestructionsofpowerresultfromanonobservancebytherulers
　　oftheconditionsunderwhichtheirpowerwasentrustedtothem；or
　　3thatthewillofthepeopleisdelegatedtotherulers
　　conditionally，butthattheconditionsareunknownandindefinite，and
　　thattheappearanceofseveralauthorities，theirstrugglesand
　　theirfalls，resultsolelyfromthegreaterorlesserfulfillmentby
　　therulersoftheseunknownconditionsonwhichthewillofthepeople
　　istransferredfromsomepeopletoothers。
　　Andthesearethethreewaysinwhichthehistoriansdoexplain
　　therelationofthepeopletotheirrulers。
　　Somehistorians—thosebiographicalandspecialisthistorians
　　alreadyreferredto—intheirsimplicityfailingtounderstandthe
　　questionofthemeaningofpower，seemtoconsiderthatthecollective
　　willofthepeopleisunconditionallytransferredtohistorical
　　persons，andthereforewhendescribingsomesinglestatetheyassume
　　thatparticularpowertobetheoneabsoluteandrealpower，and
　　thatanyotherforceopposingthisisnotapowerbutaviolationof
　　power—mereviolence。
　　Theirtheory，suitableforprimitiveandpeacefulperiodsof
　　history，hastheinconvenience—inapplicationtocomplexandstormy
　　periodsinthelifeofnationsduringwhichvariouspowersarise
　　simultaneouslyandstrugglewithoneanother—thataLegitimist
　　historianwillprovethattheNationalConvention，theDirectory，
　　andBonaparteweremereinfringersofthetruepower，whilea
　　RepublicanandaBonapartistwillprove：theonethattheConvention
　　andtheotherthattheEmpirewastherealpower，andthatallthe
　　otherswereviolationsofpower。Evidentlytheexplanations
　　furnishedbythesehistoriansbeingmutuallycontradictorycanonly
　　satisfyyoungchildren。
　　Recognizingthefalsityofthisviewofhistory，anothersetof
　　historianssaythatpowerrestsonaconditionaldelegationofthe
　　willofthepeopletotheirrulers，andthathistoricalleadershave
　　poweronlyconditionallyoncarryingouttheprogramthatthewill
　　ofthepeoplehasbytacitagreementprescribedtothem。Butwhatthis
　　programconsistsinthesehistoriansdonotsay，oriftheydothey
　　continuallycontradictoneanother。
　　Eachhistorian，accordingtohisviewofwhatconstitutesanation’s
　　progress，looksfortheseconditionsinthegreatness，wealth，
　　freedom，orenlightenmentofcitizensofFranceorsomeothercountry。
　　Butnottomentionthehistorians’contradictionsastothenature
　　ofthisprogram—orevenadmittingthatsomeonegeneralprogramof
　　theseconditionsexists—thefactsofhistoryalmostalwayscontradict
　　thattheory。Iftheconditionsunderwhichpowerisentrusted
　　consistinthewealth，freedom，andenlightenmentofthepeople，how
　　isitthatLouisXIVandIvantheTerribleendtheirreigns
　　tranquilly，whileLouisXVIandCharlesIareexecutedbytheir
　　people？TothisquestionhistoriansreplythatLouisXIV’sactivity，
　　contrarytotheprogram，reactedonLouisXVI。Butwhydiditnot
　　reactonLouisXIVoronLouisXV—whyshoulditreactjustonLouis
　　XVI？Andwhatisthetimelimitforsuchreactions？Tothesequestions
　　thereareandcanbenoanswers。Equallylittledoesthisviewexplain
　　whyforseveralcenturiesthecollectivewillisnotwithdrawnfrom
　　certainrulersandtheirheirs，andthensuddenlyduringaperiodof
　　fiftyyearsistransferredtotheConvention，totheDirectory，to
　　Napoleon，toAlexander，toLouisXVIII，toNapoleonagain，to
　　CharlesX，toLouisPhilippe，toaRepublicangovernment，andto
　　NapoleonIII。Whenexplainingtheserapidtransfersofthepeople’s
　　willfromfromoneindividualtoanother，especiallyinviewof
　　internationalrelations，conquests，andalliances，thehistorians
　　areobligedtoadmitthatsomeofthesetransfersarenotnormal
　　delegationsofthepeople’swillbutareaccidentsdependenton
　　cunning，onmistakes，oncraft，orontheweaknessofadiplomatist，a
　　ruler，orapartyleader。Sothatthegreaterpartoftheeventsof
　　history—civilwars，revolutions，andconquests—arepresentedby
　　thesehistoriansnotastheresultsoffreetransferencesofthe
　　people’swill，butasresultsoftheill—directedwillofoneor
　　moreindividuals，thatis，onceagain，asusurpationsofpower。Andso
　　thesehistoriansalsoseeandadmithistoricaleventswhichare
　　exceptionstothetheory。
　　Thesehistoriansresembleabotanistwho，havingnoticedthatsome
　　plantsgrowfromseedsproducingtwocotyledons，shouldinsistthat
　　allthatgrowsdoessobysproutingintotwoleaves，andthatthe
　　palm，themushroom，andeventheoak，whichblossomintofullgrowth
　　andnolongerresembletwoleaves，aredeviationsfromthetheory。
　　Historiansofthethirdclassassumethatthewillofthepeople
　　istransferredtohistoricpersonagesconditionally，butthatthe
　　conditionsareunknowntous。Theysaythathistoricalpersonageshave
　　poweronlybecausetheyfulfillthewillofthepeoplewhichhas
　　beendelegatedtothem。
　　Butinthatcase，iftheforcethatmovesnationsliesnotinthe
　　historicleadersbutinthenationsthemselves，whatsignificancehave
　　thoseleaders？
　　Theleaders，thesehistorianstellus，expressthewillofthe
　　people：theactivityoftheleadersrepresentstheactivityofthe
　　people。
　　Butinthatcasethequestionariseswhetheralltheactivityofthe
　　leadersservesasanexpressionofthepeople’swilloronlysomepart
　　ofit。Ifthewholeactivityoftheleadersservesastheexpression
　　ofthepeople’swill，assomehistorianssuppose，thenallthedetails
　　ofthecourtscandalscontainedinthebiographiesofaNapoleonor
　　aCatherineservetoexpressthelifeofthenation，whichis
　　evidentnonsense；butifitisonlysomeparticularsideofthe
　　activityofanhistoricalleaderwhichservestoexpressthe
　　people’slife，asotherso—called"philosophical"historians
　　believe，thentodeterminewhichsideoftheactivityofaleader
　　expressesthenation’slife，wehavefirstofalltoknowinwhat
　　thenation’slifeconsists。