Napoleon's Death Controversy

News and Calendar

by Dana Lombardy

Ben Weider, co-author of Assassination at St. Helena Revisited (1978 and 1995; reviewed in Napoleon #1 on page 36) and The Murder of Napoleon (1982), challenged the orthodox historical interpretations that the Emperor died of stomach cancer in 1821 while in exile at St. Helena. Despite evidence that Napoleon's father and several of his siblings also succumbed to cancer in various forms, Weider based his argument on the 1950s research of the late Sten Forshufvud, a Swedish dentist and amateur sleuth. Forshufvud theorized that Napoleon's symptoms, as noted by eyewitnesses, did not describe a man wasting away from cancer. He suspected arsenic poisoning. This seemed to be verified when hair allegedly taken from Napoleon at various times during his second and final exile tested positive to varying levels of arsenic.

Weider contends that the Bourbons, who were restored to power in France in 1815, were fearful that Napoleon might escape from St. Helena as he did from Elba and retake the throne. Weider asserts the royalists used Count Charles-Tristan de Montholon, Napoleon's wine steward, to slowly poison the Emperor starting in 1816. Some scholars have challenged the authenticity of the hair or other aspects of the thesis.

The latest refutation appears in the July, 1998 issue of the British Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Science.

Professor Thomas Hindmarsh of the University of Ottawa and Professor Philip Corso of Yale University wrote that an English doctor named Arnott inadvertently gave Napoleon calomel, a mercury-rich compound prescribed in the 19th Century to relieve constipation.

According to the article, calomel caused gastric bleeding and Napoleon died from shock. Hindmarsh and Corso state that the Emperor was a victim of medical malpractice, not an assassination plot, since neither Napoleon nor anyone else living with him showed signs of poisoning. They suspect that the high levels of arsenic in the hair stemmed from its use as a preservative.

"Nothing but hogwash," Weider retorted. "These two guys spent the last five years claiming that Napoleon had died of cancer and instead of admitting they were wrong, they're back with this lame theory that it was a medical blunder." Milo Keynes, a medical historian based in Cambridge who has studied Napoleon's death, was also dubious of the latest theory: "They [British doctors] were not allowed anywhere near him for many years. So ... how did they get it to him?"

Back to Table of Contents -- Napoleon #13
Back to Napoleon List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1998 by Napoleon LLC.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
The full text and graphics from other military history magazines and gaming magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com
Order Napoleon magazine direct