Both materials present the issue of whether or not Chevalier’s memoir is an accurate

historical document. However, the two sources present rather different views on the matter,
which in turn expand one’s scope of considerations.
The reading passage conveys that Chevalier’s memoir is distorted. It first states that, in the
memoir, it is said that during Cavalier’s stay in Switzerland he had a lot of money, but
records show that he had to borrow money from people, showing that he wasn’t that rich.
The second thing that is stated is that it was impossible for Chavier to remember his
conversations with Voltaire years later from the conversation. Lastly it is stated that because
Chevalier had contacts, it was more probable that he had bribed his escape from the prison,
rather than escaping from the ceiling.
The lecture on the other hand, focuses on the fact that Chevalier’s memoir is accurate.
Firstly he was in fact very rich, but his property needed to be sold to generate money and
this took time, so this is why he had to borrow money. The second thing that is stated is that
Chevalier took notes from the conversations he had with Voltaire and kept them for the time
he wrote his memoir. Lastly, there were much more powerful people in the same prison that
he stayed and they did not bribe their escape, proving that it was improbable that Chevalier
had the influence to bribe his escape.
Therefore, the reading and the lecture present different insights on this matter. The lecture is
rather critical that Chevalier’s memorial is an accurate hystorical document, while the
reading part states that Chevalier’s memoir is distorted.