The French attributed the Fire of Moscow au patriotisme feroce deRostopchine,* the Russians to the barbarity of the French. In reality,however, it was not, and could not be, possible to explain the burningof Moscow by making any individual, or any group of people,responsible for it. Moscow was burned because it found itself in aposition in which any town built of wood was bound to burn, quiteapart from whether it had, or had not, a hundred and thirty inferiorfire engines. Deserted Moscow had to burn as inevitably as a heap ofshavings has to burn on which sparks continually fall for severaldays. A town built of wood, where scarcely a day passes withoutconflagrations when the house owners are in residence and a policeforce is present, cannot help burning when its inhabitants have leftit and it is occupied by soldiers who smoke pipes, make campfires ofthe Senate chairs in the Senate Square, and cook themselves mealstwice a day. In peacetime it is only necessary to billet troops in thevillages of any district and the number of fires in that districtimmediately increases. How much then must the probability of fire beincreased in an abandoned, wooden town where foreign troops arequartered. "Le patriotisme feroce de Rostopchine" and the barbarity ofthe French were not to blame in the matter. Moscow was set on fireby the soldiers' pipes, kitchens, and campfires, and by thecarelessness of enemy soldiers occupying houses they did not own. Evenif there was any arson (which is very doubtful, for no one had anyreason to burn the houses- in any case a troublesome and dangerousthing to do), arson cannot be regarded as the cause, for the samething would have happened without any incendiarism.

　　*To Rostopchin's ferocious patriotism.

　　However tempting it might be for the French to blame Rostopchin'sferocity and for Russians to blame the scoundrel Bonaparte, or lateron to place an heroic torch in the hands of their own people, it isimpossible not to see that there could be no such direct cause ofthe fire, for Moscow had to burn as every village, factory, or housemust burn which is left by its owners and in which strangers areallowed to live and cook their porridge. Moscow was burned by itsinhabitants, it is true, but by those who had abandoned it and notby those who remained in it. Moscow when occupied by the enemy did notremain intact like Berlin, Vienna, and other towns, simply because itsinhabitants abandoned it and did not welcome the French with bread andsalt, nor bring them the keys of the city.BK11|CH27

　　CHAPTER XXVII

　　The absorption of the French by Moscow, radiating starwise as itdid, only reached the quarter where Pierre was staying by theevening of the second of September.

　　After the last two days spent in solitude and unusual circumstances,Pierre was in a state bordering on insanity. He was completelyobsessed by one persistent thought. He did not know how or when thisthought had taken such possession of him, but he remembered nothing ofthe past, understood nothing of the present, and all he saw andheard appeared to him like a dream.