Hastings.
NAPOLEON'S SPELLING.
(Vol. viii., pp. 386. 502.)
The question as to Napoleon's spelling may seem, at first sight, to be one of little importance; and yet, if we will look at it aright, we shall find that it involves many points of interest for the philosopher and the historian. During a residence of some years in France, I had heard it remarked, more than once, by persons who appeared hostile to the Napoleon dynasty, that its great founder had, in his bulletins and other public documents, shown an unaccountable ignorance of the common rules of orthography: but I had never seen the assertion put forth by any competent writer until I met with the remarks of Macaulay, already quoted by me, Vol. viii., p. 386.
In reply to my inquiry as to the authority for this statement, your correspondent C. has readily and kindly furnished a passable from Bourrienne's Mémoires, in which it is alleged that Napoleon's "orthographe est en général extraordinairement estropiée."
From all this it must be taken for granted, as, indeed, it has never been denied, that Napoleon's spelling is defective; but the question to be considered is, whether that defectiveness was the effect of ignorance or of design. That it did not arise from ignorance would seem probable for the following reasons.
Napoleon received his education chiefly in France; and it is to be presumed that the degree of instruction in grammar, orthography, &c., ordinarily bestowed on educated Frenchmen, was not withheld from him.
To say the least of it, he was endued with sufficient intelligence to acquire an ordinary knowledge of such matters.
Nay more: he was a man of the highest order of genius. Between the possession of genius, and a knowledge of orthography, there is, I admit, no necessary connexion. The humblest pedagogue may be able to spell more correctly than the greatest philosopher. But neither, on the other hand, does genius of any kind necessarily preclude a knowledge of spelling.