Oh God, Roberts again. I am not sure that Chandler made any significant changes in relation to updated thinking. I wouldn't say that two of the books are really about Napoleon, just that they refer to him.
I have still not completely read a full biog - I have Zamoyski, Roberts (well, I am sure I will need a doorstep one day and one should read a hagiography) and Broers - but I thought Tulard was supposed to be the best.
I've read the more recent biographies of Roberts, Dwyer, and Broers.Tulard is a classic.But I have to say that I was really excited about the first part of Patrice Gueniffey's new biography "Bonaparte. 1769-1802".
In my opinion, this work stands out, both in terms of literature and detailed knowledge. I'm really looking forward to the second part ...
I think it's healthy to read both pro and anti-Napoleon books. I would pair Zamoyski (anti-Napoleon bias) with Roberts (pro-Napoleon bias) for those wanting a popular biography. For a more scholarly approach I would pair Dwyer and Broers.
Gueniffey is very good but stops at 1802 and doesn't seem to be in a hurry to produce a second volume though he has since written a Napoleon and De Gaulle.
Roberts reading list is quite boring, the usual stuff, instead I offer this book as a must read about Nabulieone
in case you like to learn a lot about Napoleon in 1813 and about his personality, the more well known book by Odeleben, in my view a must read
A circumstantial narrative of the campaign in Saxony, in the year 1813. Written originally in German
by Odeleben, Ernst Otto Innocenz, freiherr von, 1777-1833
Agree. I got my copy of The Campaigns of Napoleon as a hand me down from my late father, along with Barbarossa (Alan Clark) and A Soldier's Story (Gen. Omar Bradley).
I have never stepped out of that gateway since then.
May I recommend the third volume of Dwyer's biography of Napoleon? It's titled Passion, Death, and Resurrection 1815-1840, and it's very good inspite of Dwyer's constant sniping at Napoleon.
The book is very well researched and Dwyer has an elegant prose.
@leo.romero Volume one and two are very well researched and elegantly written but the author exhibits an intense dislike of Napoleon that may put off some readers.
What makes volume 3 particularly good is that the period from Napoleon's death in 1821 to the return of his ashes in 1840 is rarely covered in biographies.
Oh God, Roberts again. I am not sure that Chandler made any significant changes in relation to updated thinking. I wouldn't say that two of the books are really about Napoleon, just that they refer to him.
I have still not completely read a full biog - I have Zamoyski, Roberts (well, I am sure I will need a doorstep one day and one should read a hagiography) and Broers - but I thought Tulard was supposed to be the best.
The list of best French Revolution books on the page is almost as bad. Only two good books, and one terrible one (Simon Schama's "Citizens").
I've read the more recent biographies of Roberts, Dwyer, and Broers.Tulard is a classic.But I have to say that I was really excited about the first part of Patrice Gueniffey's new biography "Bonaparte. 1769-1802".
In my opinion, this work stands out, both in terms of literature and detailed knowledge. I'm really looking forward to the second part ...
Of the recent biographies -Roberts, Dwyer, Broers, Zamoyski_ Gueniffey's is the best.
I think it's healthy to read both pro and anti-Napoleon books. I would pair Zamoyski (anti-Napoleon bias) with Roberts (pro-Napoleon bias) for those wanting a popular biography. For a more scholarly approach I would pair Dwyer and Broers.
Gueniffey is very good but stops at 1802 and doesn't seem to be in a hurry to produce a second volume though he has since written a Napoleon and De Gaulle.
Of those five authors, Chandler is the only one I've read.
I guess I have a lot of catching up to do.
Of those five authors, Chandler is the only one I've read.
I guess I have a lot of catching up to do.
Roberts reading list is quite boring, the usual stuff, instead I offer this book as a must read about Nabulieone
in case you like to learn a lot about Napoleon in 1813 and about his personality, the more well known book by Odeleben, in my view a must read
A circumstantial narrative of the campaign in Saxony, in the year 1813. Written originally in German by Odeleben, Ernst Otto Innocenz, freiherr von, 1777-1833
Wow, thank you very much for that sir. I'm sure I will enjoy this.
And thank heaven for Google and e-books. I'm sure I would never have found a hard copy of this book in my place.
Am curious though. . . does that mean you didn't enjoy Chandler?
@leo.romero
Of course I enjoyed Chandler then when I bought a copy in about 1978 or so, today I prefer other style of books.
@Hans - Karl Weiß Understood sir. Thanks again for the book!
I wonder when I'll have the chance to visit the 1813 battlefields.
Chandler is the Napoleonic Wars gateway drug. 😉
Agree. I got my copy of The Campaigns of Napoleon as a hand me down from my late father, along with Barbarossa (Alan Clark) and A Soldier's Story (Gen. Omar Bradley).
I have never stepped out of that gateway since then.
May I recommend the third volume of Dwyer's biography of Napoleon? It's titled Passion, Death, and Resurrection 1815-1840, and it's very good inspite of Dwyer's constant sniping at Napoleon.
The book is very well researched and Dwyer has an elegant prose.
Thank you for that recommendation sir.
Were the first two volumes not as good?
@leo.romero Volume one and two are very well researched and elegantly written but the author exhibits an intense dislike of Napoleon that may put off some readers.
What makes volume 3 particularly good is that the period from Napoleon's death in 1821 to the return of his ashes in 1840 is rarely covered in biographies.