In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Foreword This is a belated return, I feel, to an overly hackneyed and already nearly forgotten subject. My condition, which no longer permits me any continuous work, and my aversion for the polemical genre have caused my slowness to write and my aversion to publishing. I would even have suppressed these Letters completely, or rather I would not have written them, if it concerned only myself. But my Fatherland has not become so foreign to me that I can calmly see its Citizens oppressed, especially when they have compromised their rights only in defending my Cause. I would be the most worthless of men if on such an occasion I heeded a sentiment that is no longer either gentleness or patience, but weakness and cowardice in the one whom it prevents from fulWlling his duty. Nothing is less important for the public, I agree, than the subject matter of these Letters. The Constitution of one small Republic, the fate of one small private individual, the exposition of a few injustices, the refutation of a few sophisms: all that is not in itself important enough to merit many Readers. But if my subjects are small, my objects are large, and worthy of the attention of every decent man. Let us leave Geneva in its place and Rousseau in his humiliation. But Religion, but liberty, justice! There are things that are not beneath you whoever you might be. Let no one even seek in the style here for compensation for the dryness of the subject matter. Those who have been so strongly annoyed by a few fortunate strokes of my pen, will Wnd wherewithal to appease themselves in these Letters. The honor of defending an oppressed person might have set my heart aXame if I had spoken on someone else’s behalf. Reduced to the sad task of defending myself, I had to conWne myself to reasoning. To get excited would have been to debase myself. I will have found favor for this, then, from those who imagine it is essential for the truth to be stated coldly, an opinion I nonetheless can hardly understand. When a strong persuasion moves us, how is it possible to use frigid language? When Archimedes all ecstatic ran naked through the streets of Syracuse, had he found the truth any less because he was enthusiastic about it? Quite the contrary, the person who feels it cannot refrain from adoring it; the person who remains cold has not seen it. However that may be, I beg the Readers to be willing to put my Wne style aside, and examine only whether I reason well or badly. For in the end, I do not see how it can follow solely from the fact that an Author expresses himself in good terms that this Author does not know what he is saying. 133 ...

Share