While reading a book about A. Conan Doyle and the real life Gilchrest Murder in Glasgow, Scotland in 1908 I have been delving into Deductive Reasoning. Doyle became involved in the Marion Gilchrist Case and was able to use Deductive Reasoning to effet the release of Oscar Slater who was falsely accused and convicted of the crime. He served over 17 years before being released, largely based on Conan Doyle's efforts.
If you scratch the surface of Sherlock Holmes you will find A. Conan Doyle, his creator. And if you scratch that surface you will find his Professor at Glasgow University, Dr. Joseph Bell, who was Doyle's model for the fictional Holmes. But if you go even further back you will come to Voltaire and his 1747 novella "Zadig."
Note: I have taken the liberty of leaving out the part of this narrative which deals with the King's horse, as it is in all manner the same situation which regards the Queen's dog. I hope that this will not offend anyone, especially Voltaire, or the horse! For the full account, including the horse, you can easily Google the full story. Here then is the edited version.
"Young man," said the first eunuch, "hast thou seen the queen's dog?"
"It is a bitch," replied Zadig, with great modesty, "and not a dog."
"Thou art in the right," returned the first eunuch.
"It is a very small she-spaniel," added Zadig; "she has lately whelped; she limps on the left fore-foot, and has very long ears."
"Thou hast seen her," said the first eunuch, quite out of breath.
"No," replied Zadig, "I have not seen her, nor did I so much as know that the queen had a bitch."
The first eunuch never doubted but that Zadig had stolen the queen's bitch. They therefore had him conducted before the assembly of the grand desterham, who condemned him to the knout, and to spend the rest of his days in Siberia. Hardly was the sentence passed, when the bitch was found. The judges were reduced to the disagreeable necessity of reversing their sentence; but they condemned Zadig to pay four hundred ounces of gold for having said that he had not seen what he had seen. This fine he was obliged to pay; after which, he was permitted to plead his cause before the counsel of the grand desterham, when he spoke to the following effect.
"I was walking toward the little wood, where I afterward met the venerable eunuch. I observed on the sand the traces of an animal, and could easily perceive them to be those of a little dog. The light and long furrows impressed on little eminences of sand between the marks of the paws, plainly discovered that it was a bitch, whose dugs were hanging down, and that therefore she must have whelped a few days before. Other traces of a different kind, that always appeared to have gently brushed the surface of the sand near the marks of the fore-feet, showed me that she had very long ears; and as I remarked that there was always a slighter impression made on the sand by one foot than by the other three, I found that the bitch of our august queen was a little lame, if I may be allowed the expression."
All the judges admired Zadig for his acute and profound discernment. The news of this speech was carried even to the king and queen. Nothing was talked of but Zadig in the anti-chambers, the chambers, and the cabinet; and though many of the magi were of opinion that he ought to be burnt as a sorcerer, the king ordered his officers to restore him the four hundred ounces of gold which he had been condemned to pay.
No comments:
Post a Comment