Rostopchin’s own testimony cannot unfortunately be trusted. He, at the time, admitted the responsibility of having burned Moscow. Nevertheless later, as a voluntary exile abroad, he repudiated it. All that can be said is that either he was really responsible, or that if not he claimed the credit in the belief that the burning of Moscow would be regarded as an heroic action, and only disowned complicity when he found that it was generally considered atrocious. The French believed that the fire was caused by Rostopchin’s incendiaries, and hundreds or thousands of the Muscovites remaining in the city were hanged, bayoneted, or shot as such. The French, however, as all their history goes to show, have an unhappy tendency to lose their heads at a crisis, and it is certain that during the burning of Moscow they were wellnigh insane with panic. For the rest, they were utterly ignorant of their victims’ language. Certain facts appear to emerge from the confusion as proved:-- (1) The city was by no means entirely deserted by the more respectable classes. Tutulmin, the director of the foundling hospital, remained at his post; and a certain number of merchants and gentlemen, some of Francophil leanings, did not leave. The foreign colony--chiefly French--also remained. (2) The lowest of the lower classes naturally remained; and the disreputable elements probably preferred to take their chance of making their profit out of the invaders. The criminals in the prisons had also been released. (3) Whatever may have been the case as regards the mass of ordinary private dwellings, the palaces and mansions, of which Moscow was full, as well as most of the many warehouses and shops, were abandoned, as a seaman might say, “all standing.” (4) The fire was beginning as the Russian rear-guard left the city. (5) Plundering on the part of the invaders commenced almost immediately after their entry. (6) The wind changed its direction more than once. (7) The French captured and utilised a vast quantity of gunpowder. (8) Several thousand Russian wounded were left in the city. The obvious deduction from (1) and (3) is that Moscow was hurriedly evacuated, and this is further supported by the evidence of (7) and (8). Had there been any settled plan of destruction one does not see why the powder-magazines were not fired, and the buildings of most importance to the invaders ruined. Nothing of this description was attempted, and the ammunition was for the most part saved by the French, to their great advantage. For the rest, with a mob of soldiery, together with a mixed horde of camp-followers of all nations, beggars, criminals, and prostitutes, plundering indiscriminately, there was every opportunity for wanton destruction. The frequent changes of the wind helped to spread the conflagration, and it was further assisted by the fact that the great majority of the private dwellings were wooden constructions.