In this set of materials, the reading article and the lecturer both discuss memoir of Chevalier which is assumed to be a valuable source of earlier European societies. The author of the article believes that this memoir is fabricated and include embellished stories. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the reading article. She thinks that it was truly a reliable of source of past European societies.
First of all, the author points out that Chevalier was not wealthy person unlike claims made in his memoir. It is mentioned in the article that he lended huge amount of money from Swiss merchants. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says that he was actually an affluent person. Furthermore, she argues that he took a loan from merchants because he wanted quick money. He could not have waited for the money transferred after selling his property.
…show more content…
The article notes that the memoir was compiled many years after their meetings. The lecturer rebuts this argument. She suggests that these conversations are reliable because Chevalier used to note down conversation every night after talking with Voltaire. She elaborates upon this by mentioning that he later used these accumulated notes to write in his memoir about the conversation.
Finally, the author states that story of Chevalier escape from infamous prison of Venice is embellished in memoir. The article establishes that he rather had bribed jailer to escape from the prison. The lecturer on the other hand, posits that story is real and Chevalier was suceed in breaking the prison. She puts forth the idea that there were more powerful prisoners in that prison who could have bribed jailers but none was out of prison. Additionally, some official documents from Venice confirms his break. It is mentioned in documents that repair was done in ceiling of jail where Chevalier was