The Classic Spanish Prisoner Scam

The Spanish Prisoner Scam: Historical Foundations of a Durable Deception Model

The Spanish Prisoner scam represents one of the earliest well-documented examples of structured financial deception, and its persistence across centuries demonstrates that fraud evolves far less in its core design than in its methods of delivery. By the late nineteenth century, this scheme had already become sufficiently widespread to be described in major newspapers as a recurring and familiar swindle rather than an emerging threat. A New York Times report from 1898 referred to it as an “old swindle revived,” which indicates that even at that time, it had already been circulating long enough to establish recognizable patterns and expectations among both criminals and the public.

The narrative that defined the Spanish Prisoner scam was deceptively simple, yet psychologically precise. A letter would arrive from a foreign location, often written in slightly imperfect English, which served to reinforce the impression of authenticity rather than undermine it. The sender claimed to be unjustly imprisoned, typically for political or bureaucratic reasons, and unable to access a significant sum of money that had been hidden or secured prior to their detention. Within this narrative, the recipient was not portrayed as a random contact, but rather as a carefully selected individual whose moral character and trustworthiness had been identified through an unnamed mutual acquaintance. This framing was essential because it transformed the interaction from an unsolicited request into what appeared to be a personal appeal grounded in trust and reputation.

The recipient was then presented with a dual proposition that combined moral obligation with financial opportunity. The imprisoned individual required assistance to recover the hidden funds, and in return, a substantial portion of the fortune would be awarded to the person providing help. This arrangement allowed the recipient to interpret participation as both an act of generosity and a rational financial decision, thereby reducing internal resistance and increasing the likelihood of engagement. Although the narrative was constructed around specific historical contexts, such as political unrest or international conflict, the underlying structure proved to be adaptable to changing circumstances, which is one of the reasons it has endured for so long.

Criminal Practice and Early Evolution

The origins of the Spanish Prisoner scam extend beyond the late nineteenth century and can be traced to earlier forms of organized deception in Europe. Historical accounts from Eugène François Vidocq, a figure widely regarded as a foundational contributor to modern criminology, provide valuable insight into the early development of this type of fraud. Vidocq, who had direct experience within criminal networks before establishing France’s civilian police force, documented schemes that closely resembled the Spanish Prisoner model during his time in incarceration.

While imprisoned in Bicêtre, a facility outside Paris, Vidocq observed fellow inmates producing fraudulent letters that were sent to individuals outside the prison system. These letters, often referred to as “letters from Jerusalem,” followed a narrative structure that is nearly identical to the later Spanish Prisoner scam. The sender claimed to be in distress, possessed knowledge of hidden wealth, and required assistance to retrieve it. In return, a portion of the fortune would be granted to the recipient. The use of distant and exotic locations, such as Jerusalem, served to increase the perceived plausibility of the story while simultaneously limiting the recipient’s ability to verify the claims.

The transition from “Letters from Jerusalem” to the Spanish Prisoner narrative reflects a process of adaptation rather than innovation. Criminals modified the contextual details of the story to align with contemporary geopolitical events, thereby increasing its relevance and credibility. The core mechanism of deception, however, remained unchanged. It relied on distance, unverifiable claims, emotional appeal, and the promise of financial reward contingent upon an initial payment. This continuity demonstrates that the effectiveness of the scam is not dependent on specific historical conditions, but rather on its alignment with consistent patterns of human behavior.

Psychological Structuring and Cognitive Manipulation

The Spanish Prisoner scam is not simply a narrative device, but a carefully constructed psychological framework designed to influence perception, judgment, and decision-making. Each element of the story serves a specific function in shaping how the recipient interprets the situation and evaluates potential actions. One of the most significant aspects of this framework is the deliberate reinforcement of identity. By presenting the recipient as a person of integrity, prudence, and reliability, the scam creates an implicit expectation that the recipient will act in accordance with these qualities. This expectation is not neutral, as it introduces a form of internal pressure that can make refusal feel inconsistent with one’s self-concept.

The inclusion of a vulnerable dependent, often described as a young or helpless family member, adds an additional layer of emotional influence that reframes the situation as a moral responsibility rather than a financial transaction. This reframing is particularly effective because it shifts the focus from risk assessment to ethical consideration, thereby reducing the likelihood of critical analysis. At the same time, the promise of a substantial financial reward introduces a complementary motivation that allows the recipient to justify participation through practical reasoning. The combination of altruism and self-interest creates a balanced incentive structure that is difficult to dismiss outright.

Uncertainty is managed in a way that enhances credibility while preventing verification. The narrative provides enough detail to appear specific and authentic, yet avoids concrete information that could be independently confirmed. The reference to a mutual acquaintance, the lack of precise documentation, and the reliance on distant locations all contribute to this controlled ambiguity. Urgency is then introduced to limit the time available for reflection, which reduces the likelihood that the recipient will seek external input or conduct a thorough evaluation. Together, these elements create a temporary cognitive environment in which the narrative feels coherent, and action appears justified.

Continuity Across Modern Fraud Systems

The Spanish Prisoner scam has not disappeared, but rather transformed in its method of delivery while preserving its underlying structure. Modern variants, including email-based advance-fee fraud and international transfer schemes, follow the same fundamental pattern that was established more than a century ago. The most widely recognized contemporary example is the so-called “419 scam,” which involves unsolicited messages claiming access to large sums of money that are temporarily inaccessible due to legal or bureaucratic barriers.

In these modern forms, the communication medium has shifted from handwritten letters to digital platforms, allowing for rapid distribution to large numbers of potential targets. Despite this change, the narrative elements remain consistent. The sender presents a situation involving restricted access to funds, identifies the recipient as a trustworthy participant, and offers a significant financial reward in exchange for assistance. An initial payment is required to facilitate the process, and additional requests often follow as new complications are introduced.

The scale of modern fraud operations has increased significantly due to technological advancements, but the underlying mechanism remains unchanged. Organized groups can now reach thousands or millions of individuals simultaneously, and even a small response rate can generate substantial financial returns. Documented cases have involved losses in the millions for individual victims and tens of millions in aggregate gains for coordinated networks. This expansion in scale does not reflect a change in strategy, but rather an amplification of an established model.

Behavioral Engagement and Escalation Dynamics

The persistence of the Spanish Prisoner scam highlights the role of behavioral dynamics in sustaining fraudulent interactions. Engagement typically begins with a low-risk action, such as reading a letter or email, which does not require immediate commitment. This initial step allows curiosity to develop without triggering significant caution. As the narrative unfolds, the recipient may begin to construct a mental representation of the situation that integrates both the provided information and personal assumptions.

Once this internal model is established, it can influence subsequent decisions in ways that are not immediately apparent. The first request for money is usually framed as modest relative to the promised reward, which reduces perceived risk and increases the likelihood of compliance. After this initial investment, the recipient may experience a shift in perspective in which the situation is perceived as an ongoing process rather than a hypothetical scenario. This shift increases psychological commitment and makes disengagement more difficult.

Subsequent requests are justified through evolving complications that are presented as obstacles requiring resolution. Each additional payment is framed as a necessary step toward achieving the final outcome. The recipient may continue to engage because stopping would require acknowledging the possibility of deception and accepting the associated loss. This process illustrates how incremental commitment can lead to sustained involvement, with each decision influenced by prior actions and expectations.

Enduring Indicators and Recognition Patterns

Certain characteristics of the Spanish Prisoner scam have remained consistent across time, providing reliable indicators for recognition. Unsolicited communication from unknown sources is a primary feature, often accompanied by detailed narratives that cannot be independently verified. Claims involving inaccessible funds that require external assistance are central to the structure, as legitimate financial transactions do not rely on unknown intermediaries to unlock hidden assets.

Requests for upfront payments are a defining element of this type of fraud, and any situation in which money must be sent to receive a larger sum should be approached with caution. Emotional appeals that emphasize urgency, responsibility, or moral obligation are designed to influence behavior rather than provide verifiable information. Inconsistencies in language, formatting, or documentation may also be present, and these irregularities do not necessarily indicate incompetence but can function as part of a selection process for responsive individuals.

Repeated complications that require additional payments are a common progression once engagement begins. This pattern reflects the adaptive nature of the scam, which evolves to maximize extraction from individuals who have already demonstrated willingness to participate. These indicators are not limited to historical examples, but appear consistently across a wide range of contemporary fraud schemes.

Reprinted from Slate Magazine:

The Spanish Prisoner, the Treasure-Dangling Scam That Won’t Die

“A man in this country receives a letter from a foreign city,” reads a New York Times trend story from 1898, about a “common” scam being carried out by mail.

Titled “AN OLD SWINDLE REVIVED”, the story details how the “Spanish Prisoner” scam generally begins:

“The writer is always in jail because of some political offense. He always has some large sum of money hid, and is invariably anxious that it should be recovered and used to take care of his young and helpless daughter by some honest man. He knows of the prudence and good character of the recipient of the letter through a mutual friend, whom he does not mention for reasons of caution, and appeals to him in time of extremity for help.”

Postal shakedowns were a simple, and sometimes effective, way of illicitly separating rich people from their money in the 19th century. What was in it for the good Samaritan, just opening his mail on a boring day? Well, the sender of the letter “is willing to give one-third of the concealed fortune to the man who will recover it,” according to the Times.

What happens next is the ask: Before the treasure can be recovered, the writer just needs some money sent to him first. (The treasure, of course, never materializes.)Sound familiar? The so-called “Spanish Prisoner” scam is still around: Just this week, a top Nigerian fraud artist was arrested for his part in carrying out similar swindles via email. And the 1898 Times description of the scam’s broad outlines remains remarkably accurate, save for a few technological details.

The swindle came to be known as the “Spanish Prisoner” because, often, the letter writer claimed to be holed up in a Spanish jail, for reasons arising from the Spanish-American War. “The letter is written on thin, blue, cross-lined paper, such as is used for foreign letters, and is written as fairly well-educated foreigners write English, with a word misspelled here and there, and an occasional foreign idiom,” the 118-year-old Times story notes.

Modern readers, though, are likely more familiar with its more modern variant: official-looking emails from Nigeria, which ask the recipient to send money—often thousands of dollars—to unlock a massive treasure, which has been tied up by government officials or otherwise encumbered in some abstruse way.As in 1898, these entreaties at first blush might seem real but upon closer inspection hardly hold up. The English is a little broken, and the “official” seal of some Nigerian government agency doesn’t seem quite right. There’s an air of too much desperation.

And, yet, still, people fall for it, since the conceit of the scam isn’t that it will work every time, or even one out of a hundred times. You only need a few suckers, in other words, to make millions.

One victim in the U.S. lost $5.6 million to scammers.

One arrested Nigerian Spam Kingpin (2021) was said to have hauled in around $60 million in ill-gotten gains.But even in the days when you had to hand-write letters the scam was astonishingly successful. Eugène François Vidocq, who is called the father of criminology, documented in his memoirs a version of it perpetrated by prisoners in early 19th-century France. This was well before the Spanish-American War, when the scheme was then known as “letters from Jerusalem.”

Vidocq, who, before he founded France’s civilian police corps was a criminal himself, saw firsthand the letters while he was imprisoned in a jail in Bicètre, in rural France.

Modern Expressions of the Spanish Prisoner Scam in Contemporary Fraud

The Spanish Prisoner scam has not disappeared with time, but has expanded into multiple modern forms that preserve its underlying structure while adapting to new communication environments. These contemporary expressions demonstrate that the core mechanism of advance-fee fraud remains intact, even as delivery methods have become faster, more scalable, and more personalized. What may appear to be a wide variety of unrelated scam types is, in reality, a continuation of the same foundational narrative that has existed for centuries.

Several of the most common modern examples illustrate how this structure continues to operate:

• International inheritance and government transfer schemes: These scams often involve messages claiming to be from government officials, attorneys, or bank representatives who have access to a large sum of money that cannot be moved without assistance. The recipient is told they have been selected to help facilitate the transfer and will receive a percentage of the funds. The process always requires upfront payments, which are explained as taxes, legal fees, or administrative costs. Although the setting appears formal and official, the structure is identical to the historical model, where access to a hidden fortune is conditioned on initial financial participation.

• Romance scams with financial escalation: In these cases, the scammer builds a relationship over time, creating emotional trust and attachment before introducing a financial need. The scenario often includes being stranded in another country, facing legal trouble, or needing funds to access assets or travel. The victim is led to believe that helping will secure a shared future or eventual repayment. While the emotional component is more developed than in earlier versions, the underlying mechanism remains the same, as financial access is always positioned as dependent on the victim’s immediate contribution.

• Business email compromise and authority-based requests: These scams involve impersonation of trusted figures such as executives, vendors, or colleagues, and typically include urgent requests for financial transfers. The justification may involve a temporary problem, such as a blocked account or a time-sensitive transaction. Although these schemes may not always promise shared wealth, they still rely on restricted access to funds and immediate action. The recipient is placed in a situation where compliance appears necessary to resolve an urgent issue, which reflects the same pressure dynamics found in earlier forms of the scam.

• Lottery, prize, and winnings notifications: In these scenarios, individuals are informed that they have won a large prize, often through a random selection process, but must pay fees to claim it. These fees are described as necessary for processing, taxation, or legal clearance. The promise of reward is used to justify the initial payment, and additional costs are introduced as the process continues. The structure mirrors the Spanish Prisoner model by presenting a valuable outcome that can only be accessed through incremental financial contributions.

• Cryptocurrency and digital asset recovery scams: More recent variations involve claims of locked or inaccessible digital assets, investment opportunities, or recovery of lost cryptocurrency. The complexity of these systems is used to obscure the details and reduce the likelihood of independent verification. Victims are told that funds exist but require initial payments to unlock or transfer them. Despite the modern terminology and technology, the structure remains consistent, as access to a larger sum is always dependent on sending money first.

Across all of these examples, the continuity of the Spanish Prisoner structure is evident. Each variation presents a situation in which money is theoretically available but temporarily inaccessible, the victim is positioned as essential to resolving the situation, and financial contribution is required before any reward can be realized. The details may change, but the pattern does not.

Understanding these connections provides a practical advantage. When individuals focus on the structure rather than the surface story, it becomes easier to recognize fraud across different contexts. The Spanish Prisoner scam persists not because it is outdated, but because it remains aligned with predictable human responses, making it a continuing and highly adaptable form of deception.

Conclusion

The Spanish Prisoner scam endures not because of its complexity, but because of its alignment with stable and predictable aspects of human cognition and behavior. Its historical continuity demonstrates that the most effective forms of fraud are those that rely on fundamental psychological mechanisms rather than technological innovation. While the methods of communication have evolved from handwritten letters to digital platforms, the underlying structure has remained largely unchanged.

This persistence provides a valuable framework for understanding modern fraud. By examining the components of the Spanish Prisoner scam, it becomes possible to identify similar patterns in contemporary schemes and to recognize the mechanisms that drive engagement. The narrative elements, psychological triggers, and behavioral dynamics that define this scam continue to operate in current contexts, making it a relevant and instructive example.

Awareness of these structures allows for more informed decision-making and reduces vulnerability to manipulation. The Spanish Prisoner scam serves as a reminder that deception often relies on familiar patterns presented in new forms. Recognizing those patterns is an essential step in disrupting their effectiveness and improving resilience against fraudulent practices.

Glossary

• Advance-fee fraud model — This term refers to a structured deception in which a victim is asked to provide money in advance in order to receive a larger promised reward. The Spanish Prisoner scam represents one of the earliest documented examples of this model in practice. It relies on creating belief in a delayed financial outcome that depends on immediate participation. The model persists because it aligns with predictable human responses to opportunity and urgency.
• Bicêtre prison correspondence — This term describes the documented use of fraudulent letters produced by inmates in Bicêtre prison in France during the early nineteenth century. These letters followed a structured narrative designed to solicit money from recipients outside the prison. The correspondence demonstrates that organized deception existed within criminal environments long before modern communication systems. It provides early evidence of the systematic nature of this scam type.
• Cognitive environment shaping — This concept refers to the deliberate construction of a mental framework that influences how a recipient interprets information and evaluates decisions. In the Spanish Prisoner scam, the narrative creates a temporary sense of coherence and plausibility. This reduces critical analysis and encourages action that aligns with the presented story. The manipulation occurs through carefully arranged emotional and logical cues.
• Controlled ambiguity — This term describes the use of partial information that appears specific but cannot be independently verified. The scam provides enough detail to feel credible while avoiding concrete facts that could be confirmed. This prevents the recipient from validating or disproving the claims. It allows the narrative to remain intact within the recipient’s perception.
• Controlled urgency framing — This refers to the introduction of time pressure within the narrative to limit reflection and independent verification. The sender implies that immediate action is required to prevent loss or harm. This reduces the likelihood that the recipient will seek advice or question the situation. The urgency is structured to override cautious decision-making.
• Criminal narrative adaptation — This term describes how fraud schemes evolve by adjusting contextual details while preserving their underlying structure. The Spanish Prisoner scam shifted from Jerusalem-based narratives to Spanish imprisonment based on contemporary events. This adaptation increases plausibility without altering the core mechanism. It reflects the flexibility of deception strategies over time.
• Cross-lined foreign correspondence style — This refers to the specific visual and linguistic characteristics of letters used in the scam, including thin blue paper and slightly imperfect English. These features were intended to reinforce the appearance of authenticity and foreign origin. The style contributed to the credibility of the narrative. It served as an early form of persuasive presentation.
• Digital replication of legacy fraud — This term describes how historical scam structures are reproduced in modern communication systems such as email and messaging platforms. The Spanish Prisoner narrative now appears in digital formats with minimal structural change. The shift increases scale and speed but not complexity. It demonstrates continuity across technological eras.
• Dual incentive structure — This concept refers to the combination of moral appeal and financial reward within the scam narrative. The recipient is encouraged to act both out of perceived ethical responsibility and personal gain. This combination reduces resistance by providing multiple justifications for participation. It strengthens engagement by appealing to different motivations simultaneously.
• Emotional leverage through dependency — This term describes the use of a vulnerable individual within the narrative, such as a helpless child, to create emotional pressure. The presence of dependency reframes the situation as a moral obligation. This reduces analytical thinking and increases willingness to assist. It is a key mechanism in influencing behavior.
• Engagement escalation pattern — This refers to the progression from initial contact to increasing levels of involvement and financial commitment. The scam begins with low-risk interaction and gradually introduces requests. Each step builds on prior decisions, increasing psychological investment. This pattern makes disengagement more difficult over time.
• Foreign imprisonment narrative — This term describes the central storyline in which the sender claims to be unjustly detained in another country. The narrative creates distance and limits verification. It also introduces urgency and moral justification for assistance. This storyline has remained consistent across historical and modern versions.
• Hidden fortune premise — This refers to the claim that a significant sum of money exists but is inaccessible without external assistance. The premise is central to the scam’s appeal. It creates a sense of opportunity while justifying the need for participation. The existence of the funds is never verifiable.
• Incremental payment justification — This concept describes how each financial request is framed as necessary to overcome a specific obstacle. The initial payment is presented as small relative to the reward. Subsequent payments are introduced as new complications arise. This structure maintains engagement and increases total loss.
• Internal identity alignment — This term refers to the alignment between the recipient’s self-concept and the role assigned within the scam narrative. The recipient is portrayed as trustworthy and ethical. This creates pressure to act in accordance with that identity. Refusal becomes psychologically uncomfortable.
• Letters from Jerusalem — This historical term refers to early versions of the scam documented in European prisons. These letters used similar narratives involving hidden wealth and distress. They demonstrate that the structure predates the Spanish Prisoner label. The concept shows the long-standing nature of this fraud type.
• Low-risk entry interaction — This describes the initial stage of engagement, where the recipient reads a message without committing to action. The lack of immediate consequence encourages curiosity. This creates an entry point for further involvement. It is a critical step in the engagement process.
• Mass distribution scalability — This term refers to the ability of modern communication systems to send scam messages to large audiences simultaneously. The Spanish Prisoner model benefits from this scalability. Even a small response rate can produce significant financial gain. This increases the efficiency of fraud operations.
• Moral obligation framing — This concept describes how the scam presents the situation as requiring ethical action rather than financial judgment. The recipient is positioned as responsible for helping. This reduces skepticism and increases compliance. The framing shifts focus away from risk assessment.
• Mutual acquaintance reference — This term refers to the claim that the sender knows the recipient through an unnamed third party. This creates a sense of legitimacy and personal connection. The lack of specific identification prevents verification. It is a strategic use of implied trust.
• Narrative plausibility layering — This describes the combination of multiple believable elements within the scam story. Each detail reinforces the overall impression of authenticity. The layering makes the narrative more difficult to dismiss. It supports sustained engagement.
• Nineteenth-century postal fraud — This term refers to the widespread use of mail systems to conduct financial deception during the 1800s. The Spanish Prisoner scam was a prominent example. Postal systems enabled cross-border communication and anonymity. This period established many enduring fraud patterns.
• Non-verifiable claim structure — This concept refers to the design of statements that cannot be independently confirmed or disproven. The scam relies on such claims to maintain credibility. The lack of verification prevents contradiction. This structure is central to the deception.
• Perceived exclusivity positioning — This term describes how the recipient is presented as uniquely chosen for the opportunity. This increases perceived value and personal significance. It reduces the likelihood of sharing the information with others. Exclusivity enhances engagement.
• Political imprisonment justification — This refers to the explanation that the sender is detained for political reasons, which adds credibility and urgency. It aligns with historical contexts and creates sympathy. The justification supports the narrative without requiring evidence. It strengthens emotional appeal.
• Psychological compliance conditioning — This term describes the gradual shaping of behavior through repeated interactions and reinforced expectations. Each step increases the likelihood of continued participation. The process reduces resistance over time. It is a key mechanism in sustained fraud engagement.
• Recipient role assignment — This concept refers to the deliberate positioning of the recipient as an essential participant in the narrative. The recipient is given responsibility for resolving the situation. This increases involvement and perceived importance. It encourages action.
• Reward proportionality framing — This term describes how the promised reward is presented as reasonable relative to the effort required. The amount is large enough to motivate but not so large as to seem impossible. This balance increases plausibility. It supports decision-making in favor of participation.
• Scam continuity principle — This concept refers to the persistence of core fraud structures across time despite changes in technology. The Spanish Prisoner scam illustrates this principle clearly. The narrative remains effective because it aligns with human behavior. It demonstrates the stability of deception methods.
• Scam narrative coherence — This term describes the internal consistency of the story presented to the recipient. A coherent narrative reduces suspicion and supports belief. Each element reinforces the others. This coherence is essential for maintaining engagement.
• Sender authority illusion — This refers to the perception that the sender holds a legitimate position or status. The narrative may imply official or social authority. This increases trust and reduces questioning. The illusion is created through language and context.
• Spanish imprisonment framing — This term refers to the specific contextual version of the scam that involves detention in Spain, often linked to historical conflict. It replaced earlier geographic references. The framing increased relevance during its time. It demonstrates adaptive storytelling.
• Structural fraud template — This concept describes the repeatable pattern of elements that define the scam. It includes narrative, emotional appeal, and financial request. The template can be applied across different contexts. It is the foundation of many modern scams.
• Temporal decision compression — This term refers to the reduction of time available for thoughtful evaluation. Urgency forces quicker decisions. This increases reliance on emotional response rather than analysis. It is a deliberate manipulation technique.
• Trust-based manipulation framework — This concept describes the use of perceived trustworthiness to influence behavior. The recipient is led to believe the sender is credible. This reduces skepticism and encourages compliance. Trust becomes the primary tool of deception.
• Unnamed intermediary credibility — This term refers to the use of an unspecified third party to validate the sender’s claims. The lack of detail prevents verification. It creates a sense of connection without evidence. This supports the narrative’s plausibility.
• Unsolicited international contact pattern — This describes the characteristic approach of receiving unexpected communication from a foreign source. The contact is not initiated by the recipient. This pattern is common in fraud schemes. It serves as an early warning indicator.
• Verification barrier construction — This term refers to the deliberate creation of obstacles that prevent independent confirmation of claims. Distance, secrecy, and incomplete information contribute to this barrier. The inability to verify supports continued belief. It is central to the scam’s effectiveness.
• Victim cognitive model formation — This concept describes how the recipient builds an internal understanding of the situation based on the narrative. This model influences decisions and behavior. It may persist even when inconsistencies appear. The model becomes the basis for continued engagement.
• Wealth access obstruction narrative — This term refers to the explanation that funds exist but cannot be accessed without external help. The obstruction justifies the need for the recipient’s involvement. It creates a problem that the scam proposes to solve. This narrative is central to the structure.
• Written authenticity simulation — This describes the intentional use of language and formatting to mimic genuine communication. Slight imperfections are included to enhance realism. The simulation increases credibility. It supports the overall deception strategy.

Reference

“Sir,—You will doubtlessly be astonished at receiving a letter from a person unknown to you,” one such letter began, according to Vidocq’s recollection. The structure of this letter is savvy. Before unleashing his tale of woe, the writer offers the carrot first: a casket containing 16,000 francs in gold as well as diamonds, which the writer says he and his master were forced to leave behind after they were detained while traveling. Having laid out the stakes, he continues, writing of his eventual supposed imprisonment, before, finally, they ask, which in this case is very subtle: “I beg to know if I cannot, through your aid, obtain the casket in question and get a portion of the money which it contains. I could then supply my immediate necessities and pay my counsel, who dictates this and assures me that by some presents, I could extricate myself from this affair.”

Vidocq wrote that 20 percent of such letters received some kind of reply, and, in some cases, prisoners made hundreds of francs from the letters, which were tacitly allowed by jailers, who would also take a cut.

Fast forward nearly 200 years to the 1980s, when scammers in Nigeria began to send reams of paper letters to people across the world. By the 1990s, they used fax machines and, by the late 1990s, had switched to email.

In the most recent case, a man known only as “Mike,” was arrested, according to the BBC. Over the years, Mike oversaw dozens of people who sent an untold number of emails out across the world, from the U.S. to India to Romania, using the digital age to realize the full potential of the swindle.