What do you think?
Rate this book
Napoleon
On a cold December day in 1840 Parisians turned out in force to watch as the body of Napoleon was solemnly carried on a riverboat from Courbevoie on its final journey to the Invalides. The return of their long-dead Emperor's corpse from the Island of St Helena was a moment that Paris had eagerly awaited, though many feared that the memories stirred would serve to further destabilize a country that had struggled for order and direction since he had been sent into exile. In this book, Alan Forrest, tells the remarkable story of how the son of a Corsican attorney became the most powerful man in Europe, a man whose charisma and legacy endured after his lonely death many thousands of miles from the country whose fate had become so entwined with his own. Along the way, Alan Forrest also cuts away the many layers of myth and counter myth that have grown up around Napoleon, a man who mixed history and legend promiscuously and, drawing on original research and his own distinguished background in French history, demonstrates that Napoleon was as much a product of his times as their creator.
416 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2011
77 people are currently reading
381 people want to read
About the author
Alan Forrest
36 books15 followersAlan Forrest is Emeritus Professor of Modern History at the University of York. He works on modern French history, especially the period of the French Revolution and Empire, and on the history of modern warfare.
He serves on the editorial boards of French History and War in History, and is a member of the advisory committee for Annales historiques de la Revolution Francaise. He also co-edits a series for Palgrave-Macmillan on 'War, Culture and Society, 1750-1850'.
He serves on the editorial boards of French History and War in History, and is a member of the advisory committee for Annales historiques de la Revolution Francaise. He also co-edits a series for Palgrave-Macmillan on 'War, Culture and Society, 1750-1850'.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
October 25, 2014
This is a good, readable survey of this monumental figure but it only rates 3 stars for two personal reasons.
1. There's no doubt about the research or accuracy of this biography but I prefer a more fully rounded portrait. Here, I have excellent history without getting any real appreciation of Napoleon as a person, the inner man behind all the exploits.
2. There are historians who present their craft in an accessible way (as Forrest does here) and then there are historians who, in addition to their academic prowess also write with a narrative that draws the reader into the times being discussed. Forrest's book is a competent overview of Bonaparte's life but it lacks the dramatic sweep that would make us feel as though we are there. If you read Robert K. Massie's or Orlando Figes's works on Russia you'll see what I mean.
Otherwise, ok.
1. There's no doubt about the research or accuracy of this biography but I prefer a more fully rounded portrait. Here, I have excellent history without getting any real appreciation of Napoleon as a person, the inner man behind all the exploits.
2. There are historians who present their craft in an accessible way (as Forrest does here) and then there are historians who, in addition to their academic prowess also write with a narrative that draws the reader into the times being discussed. Forrest's book is a competent overview of Bonaparte's life but it lacks the dramatic sweep that would make us feel as though we are there. If you read Robert K. Massie's or Orlando Figes's works on Russia you'll see what I mean.
Otherwise, ok.
January 17, 2013
Napoleon as spin doctor. Even as a young general he developed a sympathetic network of writers and publications to whom he provided copy; as a powerful emperor he imposed press controls and censorship; his memoirs were written with a view to securing his legacy as the one who secured the accomplishments of the French Revolution.
This is a balanced book--Napoleon-haters get their say, as do those like Lazare Carnot, the Revolution's "organizer of victory," who backed out of politics when Napoleon's assumption of imperial status was the final straw in a succession of retreats from republicanism.
Its greatest value, though, is explaining how it was that Napoleon could be seen by former revolutionaries as a positive figure, even by those who were not diehard militarists spoiling for a fight. Napoleon enabled and encouraged a huge social and political transposition--from an aristocratic system, with limited opportunities determined largely by birth, to a meritocratic one, with a much broader scope for personal advancement. It is that fact that underlies his legacy and his appeal. As such he should be seen as one of the great modernizing autocrats, like Bismarck or Ataturk, who operated at least to a certain extent within the framework of "enlightened" modern, secular ideals.
This is a balanced book--Napoleon-haters get their say, as do those like Lazare Carnot, the Revolution's "organizer of victory," who backed out of politics when Napoleon's assumption of imperial status was the final straw in a succession of retreats from republicanism.
Its greatest value, though, is explaining how it was that Napoleon could be seen by former revolutionaries as a positive figure, even by those who were not diehard militarists spoiling for a fight. Napoleon enabled and encouraged a huge social and political transposition--from an aristocratic system, with limited opportunities determined largely by birth, to a meritocratic one, with a much broader scope for personal advancement. It is that fact that underlies his legacy and his appeal. As such he should be seen as one of the great modernizing autocrats, like Bismarck or Ataturk, who operated at least to a certain extent within the framework of "enlightened" modern, secular ideals.
April 10, 2025
Enjoyed hearing about all the books he took with him everywhere, he would have slayed the goodreads annual book challenge
October 23, 2020
Napoleon is an unavoidable figure of European history, and enjoys no shortage of admirers even today. For years he dominated a continent, using native talents given abundant opportunities opened by the revolution to make himself and his family into Europe’s leading royal family — for a time. Napoleon is a highly accessible survey of his his life and work, with a focus more on politics than military matters, which also examines (in brief) his enduring legacy, as l’empeurer continues to fascinate us.
Much of Bonaparte’s origins are well known to educated readers: his family upbringing on a small island named Corsica, linked to Italy by culture by annexed by France only a few years before Bonaparte’s birth. Between masters Corsica was an independent Republic, and the Bonapartes established themselves as prominent members thereof. That exercise in republican government had been crushed by the time Napoleon came of age, but it left its mark — and when he began working for his and Corsica’s future, it was through the new French Republic, in service as an artillery officer. The French revolution overthrew the nobility and church, and gave French society the chance to recreate itself. although it mostly committed itself to a prolonged spat of self-destruction. Napoleon’s rise to power through his proven talents on the battlefield during the early Wars of the Coalition is fairly boilerplate, but Forrest also introduces readers to Napoleon as a young man, a pseudo-intellectual, writing revolutionary tracts. Napoleon’s pretensions would grow once he’d become First Consul and Emperor, having himself included in the ranks of the French academy.
Napoleon is only a brief survey, so military campaigns are not considered in depth; battles like Abukir, Jena, Austerlitz, etc are dispatched in a sentence or two. Waterloo proves an exception, earning a few paragraphs. Forrest keeps context in view, providing commentary on the ever-evolving Empire, beginning as it did with a militant republic and taking on another form altogether. Forrest notes with surprise that the French people weren’t fussed in the least about the last vestiges of the Republic being scrapped and a new monarchy imposed. Possibly this owes to Napoleon’s new creature in the Empire, which mixed revolutionary ideas with some nods to the past. One example of this would be the Concordant with Rome, which ended the revolutionary efforts to destroy every aspect of Christian culture and Catholic influence from France, but at a price: the Church would henceforth be markedly subordinate to the State, and those bishops who had actively resisted the revolution were barred. Only quisling clericals were allowed to remain in their offices. Although Napoleon was not a friend of republican government or Enlightenment-era liberalism, his status as a usurper meant that he had to obtain legitimacy through compentency, and his commitment to staffing the Empire with the most able men he could find (so long as they were loyal) created the buzz of a meritocracy in Napoleonic Europe. As Forrest notes, during Napoleon’s hundred day comeback tour, l’empereur acknowledged his imperial abuses and pledged himself to the straight and narrow, resuming the good fight against the resurrected abuses of the Bourbon restoration. This, Forrest argues, is part of the Corsican’s enduring popularity in France: he was reinvented as a standard bearer of republicanism against the heavy weight of inefficient and arbitrary traditional authority in Europe.
Although I hadn’t expected to read this book (a patron ordered it via ILL and it caught my eye before I sent it back), and although I’m not a fan of Napoleon, I rather enjoyed this survey. I especially appreciated Forrest’ efforts to deliver a full picture of Napoleon, his times, and the nature of the empire he and so many others forged, rather than being bogged down with countless reviews of military maneuvers.
Much of Bonaparte’s origins are well known to educated readers: his family upbringing on a small island named Corsica, linked to Italy by culture by annexed by France only a few years before Bonaparte’s birth. Between masters Corsica was an independent Republic, and the Bonapartes established themselves as prominent members thereof. That exercise in republican government had been crushed by the time Napoleon came of age, but it left its mark — and when he began working for his and Corsica’s future, it was through the new French Republic, in service as an artillery officer. The French revolution overthrew the nobility and church, and gave French society the chance to recreate itself. although it mostly committed itself to a prolonged spat of self-destruction. Napoleon’s rise to power through his proven talents on the battlefield during the early Wars of the Coalition is fairly boilerplate, but Forrest also introduces readers to Napoleon as a young man, a pseudo-intellectual, writing revolutionary tracts. Napoleon’s pretensions would grow once he’d become First Consul and Emperor, having himself included in the ranks of the French academy.
Napoleon is only a brief survey, so military campaigns are not considered in depth; battles like Abukir, Jena, Austerlitz, etc are dispatched in a sentence or two. Waterloo proves an exception, earning a few paragraphs. Forrest keeps context in view, providing commentary on the ever-evolving Empire, beginning as it did with a militant republic and taking on another form altogether. Forrest notes with surprise that the French people weren’t fussed in the least about the last vestiges of the Republic being scrapped and a new monarchy imposed. Possibly this owes to Napoleon’s new creature in the Empire, which mixed revolutionary ideas with some nods to the past. One example of this would be the Concordant with Rome, which ended the revolutionary efforts to destroy every aspect of Christian culture and Catholic influence from France, but at a price: the Church would henceforth be markedly subordinate to the State, and those bishops who had actively resisted the revolution were barred. Only quisling clericals were allowed to remain in their offices. Although Napoleon was not a friend of republican government or Enlightenment-era liberalism, his status as a usurper meant that he had to obtain legitimacy through compentency, and his commitment to staffing the Empire with the most able men he could find (so long as they were loyal) created the buzz of a meritocracy in Napoleonic Europe. As Forrest notes, during Napoleon’s hundred day comeback tour, l’empereur acknowledged his imperial abuses and pledged himself to the straight and narrow, resuming the good fight against the resurrected abuses of the Bourbon restoration. This, Forrest argues, is part of the Corsican’s enduring popularity in France: he was reinvented as a standard bearer of republicanism against the heavy weight of inefficient and arbitrary traditional authority in Europe.
Although I hadn’t expected to read this book (a patron ordered it via ILL and it caught my eye before I sent it back), and although I’m not a fan of Napoleon, I rather enjoyed this survey. I especially appreciated Forrest’ efforts to deliver a full picture of Napoleon, his times, and the nature of the empire he and so many others forged, rather than being bogged down with countless reviews of military maneuvers.
January 16, 2025
My wife and I went on tour to Croatia in southeastern Europe. One of the cathedrals was where Napoleon kept his horses. I thought what a nerve to use a sacred place of these people to store your horses. I decided to read a book on Napoleon. It was a long book and I had to renew it several times. Like most books I read, it takes quite a few pages for me to read a lot in it because things start inter-relating and then I want to see how it turns out.
Napoleon seems to have been in the right place at the right time to have taken over POWER in France. France had a very troubled history from 1770 to 1850 with the French Revolution and the terror of the Jacobins killing the Bourbon monarchy. Next, was the struggle of the First Republic when the democratic (a very optimistic use of "democratic") years were in play, the the Empire of Napoleon. Next, was his exile to the Isle of Elba, which was poorly handled. Then, his return as the Emperor again. Then his exile on the island of St. Helena, west of South Africa. The Bourbon monarchy was re-established. Other Republics occurred and his nephew Napoleon established another empire around 1851.
Napoleon's Empire was built on war and conqueiring other countries and people. He was touted as an expert at battle but was a MONSTER, conscripting young men ages 17 to 20 into battle. He was way off thinking he could march through the 40 below weather to defeat Russia. Instead, he was defeated. He lost in several battles before he was removed from his throne by Prussia, Russia, Britain, and Austria. Thousands of soldiers on both sides were killed, and what for? No, he was not a good soldier nor leader. A young child can wake up and walk outside and see the beautiful day and say, "This is beautiful." No, Napoleon Bonaparte, could not see what IS AND WAS GOOD. He escaped from Elba and worked his way back into power. Unlike the young child, Napoleon only saw power, insisting on continuing as a dictator, raising another army, and plunging Europe into a bloody conflict again. To Bonaparte, THAT WAS GOOD. B U T IT WAS NOT. Britain under Wellington, (Britain was Napoleon's worst nightmare.), Russia, Austria, and Prussia knew Europe would not be safe with this monster in power. They met him at Waterloo. Hundreds of thousands died and many more thousands wounded for life. He was dethroned again and sent to St. Helena. There he lived for quite a few years. HIs memoirs were not about the many soldiers of the "ENEMY' OR HIS OWN SOLDIERS HE SENT TO THEIR DEATHS but laughably of how this maneuver or that of his admirals and he could still be on the throne.
People looking to do wrong, eventually get JADED CONSCIENCES. They are not listening what the Light of Christ inside them is saying. Wrong THEN looks right. One mistep leads to another then they end very far afield of right. By then, they don't care what is right.
Napoleon seems to have been in the right place at the right time to have taken over POWER in France. France had a very troubled history from 1770 to 1850 with the French Revolution and the terror of the Jacobins killing the Bourbon monarchy. Next, was the struggle of the First Republic when the democratic (a very optimistic use of "democratic") years were in play, the the Empire of Napoleon. Next, was his exile to the Isle of Elba, which was poorly handled. Then, his return as the Emperor again. Then his exile on the island of St. Helena, west of South Africa. The Bourbon monarchy was re-established. Other Republics occurred and his nephew Napoleon established another empire around 1851.
Napoleon's Empire was built on war and conqueiring other countries and people. He was touted as an expert at battle but was a MONSTER, conscripting young men ages 17 to 20 into battle. He was way off thinking he could march through the 40 below weather to defeat Russia. Instead, he was defeated. He lost in several battles before he was removed from his throne by Prussia, Russia, Britain, and Austria. Thousands of soldiers on both sides were killed, and what for? No, he was not a good soldier nor leader. A young child can wake up and walk outside and see the beautiful day and say, "This is beautiful." No, Napoleon Bonaparte, could not see what IS AND WAS GOOD. He escaped from Elba and worked his way back into power. Unlike the young child, Napoleon only saw power, insisting on continuing as a dictator, raising another army, and plunging Europe into a bloody conflict again. To Bonaparte, THAT WAS GOOD. B U T IT WAS NOT. Britain under Wellington, (Britain was Napoleon's worst nightmare.), Russia, Austria, and Prussia knew Europe would not be safe with this monster in power. They met him at Waterloo. Hundreds of thousands died and many more thousands wounded for life. He was dethroned again and sent to St. Helena. There he lived for quite a few years. HIs memoirs were not about the many soldiers of the "ENEMY' OR HIS OWN SOLDIERS HE SENT TO THEIR DEATHS but laughably of how this maneuver or that of his admirals and he could still be on the throne.
People looking to do wrong, eventually get JADED CONSCIENCES. They are not listening what the Light of Christ inside them is saying. Wrong THEN looks right. One mistep leads to another then they end very far afield of right. By then, they don't care what is right.
June 9, 2017
This is a well-written story highlighting the key milestones in Napoleon's life, from his Corsican upbringing, his career as a brilliant post-revolutionary general, his later attainment of absolute power and creation of the First French Empire to his downfall and death in exile.
What makes this a worthy read to me is Alan's ability to describe the life of the historical figure in vivid colors against the backdrop of history. We can see how Napoleon learned to navigate through the tumultuous and turbulent tides of late 18th and early 19th-century Europe. In modern terms, readers can observe his thought process and witness his problem-solving skills in the face of adversities. His stellar reputation as a military strategist and tactician aside, Napoleon demonstrated an iron-willed determination to accomplish whatever he set out for himself. "He had worked prodigiously over many years, planning his every move in meticulous detail."
The moment I closed the book, I could not help imagining what a brilliant career in business Napoleon would build today, supposing that he was born in our time. As mentioned earlier, he possessed excellent work ethic and showed no hesitation in hard talks and confrontation with others to get what he wanted- essential qualities in a brutally competitive world. More importantly, Napoleon was also a master of persuasion whose understanding of human psychology proved a valuable asset in networking. For one thing, he well understood "who you know matters as much as what you know" and successfully brought others to his aide. His stunning success in public relations management (propaganda you may say) has always stood him in such good stead that we still remember him almost 200 years on. Imagine how influential a figure he would be today, given all the powerful social networks like Facebook and Twitter!
What makes this a worthy read to me is Alan's ability to describe the life of the historical figure in vivid colors against the backdrop of history. We can see how Napoleon learned to navigate through the tumultuous and turbulent tides of late 18th and early 19th-century Europe. In modern terms, readers can observe his thought process and witness his problem-solving skills in the face of adversities. His stellar reputation as a military strategist and tactician aside, Napoleon demonstrated an iron-willed determination to accomplish whatever he set out for himself. "He had worked prodigiously over many years, planning his every move in meticulous detail."
The moment I closed the book, I could not help imagining what a brilliant career in business Napoleon would build today, supposing that he was born in our time. As mentioned earlier, he possessed excellent work ethic and showed no hesitation in hard talks and confrontation with others to get what he wanted- essential qualities in a brutally competitive world. More importantly, Napoleon was also a master of persuasion whose understanding of human psychology proved a valuable asset in networking. For one thing, he well understood "who you know matters as much as what you know" and successfully brought others to his aide. His stunning success in public relations management (propaganda you may say) has always stood him in such good stead that we still remember him almost 200 years on. Imagine how influential a figure he would be today, given all the powerful social networks like Facebook and Twitter!
June 4, 2025
Pretty readable as far as history is concerned. Blazes through a lot of historical eras quickly which is good and bad. Definitely biased towards Napoleon
April 11, 2013
As the subtitle states, author Alan Forrest tells the story of Napoleon with emphasis on his legacy and image. He shows how from the very beginning, Napoleon was a master propagandist. He created his own image through flourish, dash and good press which he initiated and controlled and bad press which he vigorously suppressed.
Carlo Bonaparte, a somewhat connected lawyer in the turbulent politics of Corsica, saw to it that his son Napoleon, had good military education. While in school Napoleon read widely and prepared himself for the opportunities the Revolution provided to non-nobles. He made the best of the commissions he received and used their successes to cultivate an heroic image.
Forrest's best example of Napoleon's self-propaganda is the Egyptian campaign. Its goal (containing the British) was not met. There was a tremendous loss of life. After delivering an unabashedly self-serving farewell to the troops, Napoleon virtually left them in Egypt to fend for themselves. Taking the scholars on the campaign not only fit his academic bent, but also had a post-campaign propaganda benefit. They returned to France with lecture material, artifacts for public viewing and content for artists to paint. There were no embedded reporters so Napoleon was reasonably free to emphasize the successful battles and ignore the losing ones. To the French people, the Egyptian campaign appeared to be a great success.
Napoleon skillfully exploited the Revolution's ideals of equality all the while promoting a monarchical status for himself. Even his Revolution-inspired encouraged him to make a dynastic marriage to produce an heir. Forrest shows how he was able to pull this off.
That he inspired so many is evident in the ease of his return to Paris from Elba. That his name had lasting resonance is evident in France's 1848 election, the first with universal male suffrage, was easily won by a relative bearing the Bonaparte name. Even today, tour guides at the Waterloo Battlefield report that the most interest is in its loser, not its victor.
The last chapter sums up the image that we have of Napoleon today. Because of all that precedes it you can see how this understanding is highly influenced by Napoleon himself.
While the material is presented in chronological order, it is not a biography and will not satisfy those looking for the Napoleon story. General readers who are interested in how Napoleon influenced his own rise to power and his impact then and now will find a lot here.
A recent book on this period The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo shows the era from a both a general's experience and that of a former slave. It is a good complement to this book.
Carlo Bonaparte, a somewhat connected lawyer in the turbulent politics of Corsica, saw to it that his son Napoleon, had good military education. While in school Napoleon read widely and prepared himself for the opportunities the Revolution provided to non-nobles. He made the best of the commissions he received and used their successes to cultivate an heroic image.
Forrest's best example of Napoleon's self-propaganda is the Egyptian campaign. Its goal (containing the British) was not met. There was a tremendous loss of life. After delivering an unabashedly self-serving farewell to the troops, Napoleon virtually left them in Egypt to fend for themselves. Taking the scholars on the campaign not only fit his academic bent, but also had a post-campaign propaganda benefit. They returned to France with lecture material, artifacts for public viewing and content for artists to paint. There were no embedded reporters so Napoleon was reasonably free to emphasize the successful battles and ignore the losing ones. To the French people, the Egyptian campaign appeared to be a great success.
Napoleon skillfully exploited the Revolution's ideals of equality all the while promoting a monarchical status for himself. Even his Revolution-inspired encouraged him to make a dynastic marriage to produce an heir. Forrest shows how he was able to pull this off.
That he inspired so many is evident in the ease of his return to Paris from Elba. That his name had lasting resonance is evident in France's 1848 election, the first with universal male suffrage, was easily won by a relative bearing the Bonaparte name. Even today, tour guides at the Waterloo Battlefield report that the most interest is in its loser, not its victor.
The last chapter sums up the image that we have of Napoleon today. Because of all that precedes it you can see how this understanding is highly influenced by Napoleon himself.
While the material is presented in chronological order, it is not a biography and will not satisfy those looking for the Napoleon story. General readers who are interested in how Napoleon influenced his own rise to power and his impact then and now will find a lot here.
A recent book on this period The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo shows the era from a both a general's experience and that of a former slave. It is a good complement to this book.
January 21, 2014
For many years I have wanted to read a book about Napoleon because so many other books I read referenced him. Whether they were about the time of his reign or the affects of it, Napoleon certainly made his mark. I don't think this was the best book on Napoleon, but I had to start somewhere. The author tends to repeat himself a lot, and I wish there had been some maps included.
There were many interesting things in the book, and here are just a few highlights.
Napoleon was originally from Corsica, which I did not know. Many countries had tried over time to rule Corsica but found it very difficult. When the French tried, Napoleon's father decided to use what influence he could to have his sons educated in France. Through Napoleon's early life he struggled with his loyalties to his native home and becoming a true Frenchman.
I also had never given much thought to Napoleon's siblings and family but they were a big part of his life. He tried to put his brothers in positions of power, but also tried to ensure that they did what he wanted, which of course did not go over too well.
Napoleon was a master at propaganda, and throughout his career understood how to use the media to his advantage. Even when campaigns were unsuccessful or unimportant, he would convince the masses of the complete opposite. He was a great leader but his rise to power had a lot to do with propaganda.
Napoleon's Hundred Days are incredible. He was banished to Elba, and then when the British rep was out of town, he took a small force and basically marched back to the Capitol and too over again. The written account of this is just so interesting. Who does that? Napoleon, that's who.
Also...he wrote a play.
Here are some books that I have read which deal with Napoleon during his reign or are influenced by his reign.
The Dreyfus Affair
War and Peace
A Tale of Two Cities
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
Les Misérables
The Count of Monte Cristo
William Wilberforce The Life of the Great Anti-Slave Trade Campaigner
There were many interesting things in the book, and here are just a few highlights.
Napoleon was originally from Corsica, which I did not know. Many countries had tried over time to rule Corsica but found it very difficult. When the French tried, Napoleon's father decided to use what influence he could to have his sons educated in France. Through Napoleon's early life he struggled with his loyalties to his native home and becoming a true Frenchman.
I also had never given much thought to Napoleon's siblings and family but they were a big part of his life. He tried to put his brothers in positions of power, but also tried to ensure that they did what he wanted, which of course did not go over too well.
Napoleon was a master at propaganda, and throughout his career understood how to use the media to his advantage. Even when campaigns were unsuccessful or unimportant, he would convince the masses of the complete opposite. He was a great leader but his rise to power had a lot to do with propaganda.
Napoleon's Hundred Days are incredible. He was banished to Elba, and then when the British rep was out of town, he took a small force and basically marched back to the Capitol and too over again. The written account of this is just so interesting. Who does that? Napoleon, that's who.
Also...he wrote a play.
Here are some books that I have read which deal with Napoleon during his reign or are influenced by his reign.
The Dreyfus Affair
War and Peace
A Tale of Two Cities
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
Les Misérables
The Count of Monte Cristo
William Wilberforce The Life of the Great Anti-Slave Trade Campaigner
January 3, 2013
The book starts off giving you an idea of how important Napoleon was as a symbol and how even the idea of Napoleon was something to feared. However the author could have easily done this in about 200 pages instead of the repetitive nature in which there were times a would go back to see if he had verbatim copied a sentence he used pages earier. While this was an interesting read, it dragged on in parts where it didn't need to.
March 18, 2017
Altough it did satisfy my curiosity about Napoleon Bonaparte, i feel that it went trough many aspects of his life and history itself barely scratching the surface, insisting on Napoleon's use of propaganda in creating the "Napoleonian myth", and couldn't offer a substantial analysis of his personality or his actions.
July 25, 2015
The general that is spoken like a legend could not have been portrayed more akin to a boring tax accountant than a leader.
June 5, 2018
this doesn't even resemble a review, these are just notes from my bookmark
121- neo-Jacobins were especially strong in the upper echelons of the army- Year VIII overthrowing of the Directory of Brumaire: Sieyes, Fouche, Barras
170- In 1799, the new Constitution described itself as being 'founded on the principles of representative government... sacred rights' of the revolution, however Carnot's public expression of his doubts on this matter in 1804 led to the death of his political career
197- army as an institution remained answerable to civil authorities, did not have autonomous power,
but accountable to what extent for war crimes i wonder??
206- under empire, they moved away from liberal individualism towards heightened censorship, greater use of police force and constraining the free market but it still wasn't antirevolutionary in that Napoleon's domestic aims were reform programmes in education, the Church and justice. Regime was thus identified with progressive/ enlightened values on the frontiers of the empire early on
230- son of the Revolution married the niece of Marie Antoinette: ceremony indicative of the departure from his republican roots (complete imitation also hereditary succession becomes more important)
240- patron of the arts/music while motive remained political>cultural. patronage was simply another facet of imperial power
284- enthusiasm for the regime in the electoral process of 1814 was more for NB than the constitutional rights that the process symbolised. Lazare Carnot (our guy!) rallied to a more liberal Napoleon in 1814, having faith in his apparent altered attitude
307- On Saint Helena, persuaded of his own invincibility, he constantly sought scapegoats for his most notable failures (ie Waterloo)
317- Germaine de Staele
320- After 1815, young men still rallied for the glory of NB, fought in the army reminiscent of imperial glory, despite fighting under the White Flag
121- neo-Jacobins were especially strong in the upper echelons of the army- Year VIII overthrowing of the Directory of Brumaire: Sieyes, Fouche, Barras
170- In 1799, the new Constitution described itself as being 'founded on the principles of representative government... sacred rights' of the revolution, however Carnot's public expression of his doubts on this matter in 1804 led to the death of his political career
197- army as an institution remained answerable to civil authorities, did not have autonomous power,
but accountable to what extent for war crimes i wonder??
206- under empire, they moved away from liberal individualism towards heightened censorship, greater use of police force and constraining the free market but it still wasn't antirevolutionary in that Napoleon's domestic aims were reform programmes in education, the Church and justice. Regime was thus identified with progressive/ enlightened values on the frontiers of the empire early on
230- son of the Revolution married the niece of Marie Antoinette: ceremony indicative of the departure from his republican roots (complete imitation also hereditary succession becomes more important)
240- patron of the arts/music while motive remained political>cultural. patronage was simply another facet of imperial power
284- enthusiasm for the regime in the electoral process of 1814 was more for NB than the constitutional rights that the process symbolised. Lazare Carnot (our guy!) rallied to a more liberal Napoleon in 1814, having faith in his apparent altered attitude
307- On Saint Helena, persuaded of his own invincibility, he constantly sought scapegoats for his most notable failures (ie Waterloo)
317- Germaine de Staele
320- After 1815, young men still rallied for the glory of NB, fought in the army reminiscent of imperial glory, despite fighting under the White Flag
December 26, 2022
I have mixed feelings about this book.
I can't say that it is not interesting because it is interesting but same time it feels like there are missing serious chunks of information. So you are supposed to know already a lot about the politics of the XVIII century and especially of France's turbulent end of the century because little info is provided (there are a lot of mentions of Jacobin political clubs but what the hell is a Jacobin political club? What is this Jacobinism?), what were the relations between England, France, Prussia, Russia, Austria at that time?
The second issue of this book is that while it discusses Napoleon's life and career and so on, we get little close to none about the most important aspect of Napoleon's actions: the wars, the battles, and the military campaigns. While Egypt is well related, Austerlitz is one paragraph and the Russian campaign is a couple of pages. I was expecting much more related to his battles than the little we get. I got more info about Trafalgar from another book I was reading which was not focused at all on Napoleon than from this book and this is annoying.
So, if you want to read about many aspects of Napoleon's life it's quite a good book but if you want to have even a faint image of his military genius, you need to search somewhere else because this one fails to deliver.
I can't say that it is not interesting because it is interesting but same time it feels like there are missing serious chunks of information. So you are supposed to know already a lot about the politics of the XVIII century and especially of France's turbulent end of the century because little info is provided (there are a lot of mentions of Jacobin political clubs but what the hell is a Jacobin political club? What is this Jacobinism?), what were the relations between England, France, Prussia, Russia, Austria at that time?
The second issue of this book is that while it discusses Napoleon's life and career and so on, we get little close to none about the most important aspect of Napoleon's actions: the wars, the battles, and the military campaigns. While Egypt is well related, Austerlitz is one paragraph and the Russian campaign is a couple of pages. I was expecting much more related to his battles than the little we get. I got more info about Trafalgar from another book I was reading which was not focused at all on Napoleon than from this book and this is annoying.
So, if you want to read about many aspects of Napoleon's life it's quite a good book but if you want to have even a faint image of his military genius, you need to search somewhere else because this one fails to deliver.
December 6, 2023
A short profile version of the life of this major historical figure with focus leaning to his political influence and stature in Europe during this tumultuous period. No doubt Napoleon is remembered as one of the most influential in history but falling short of greatness through the destruction he visited upon so many.
The rise of these types throughout history are interesting studies in how one individual can sway so many through personal traits and use of guile and focus. No doubt as illustrated in this book few could out do this man. And the tragedy as shown here is that it is founded on militarism and destruction. Yet so many followed willingly by the promise of glory and power and that says a lot about human nature.
The book is a fast paced overview of the rise to power and the turning point into decline and exile. Much focus is on the political gamesmanship that went on. Not as much coverage over the historic battles that led to his pinnacle of power and ultimate defeat.
The unnerving aspect on conclusion is that on death in exile and his triumphant return to France for enshrined burial he is once again raised to hero stature in the eyes of the French. A man who cost so many so much and the price paid in lives lost is a sad testimony indeed, and unfortunately we see this played out in political leadership to this day.
The rise of these types throughout history are interesting studies in how one individual can sway so many through personal traits and use of guile and focus. No doubt as illustrated in this book few could out do this man. And the tragedy as shown here is that it is founded on militarism and destruction. Yet so many followed willingly by the promise of glory and power and that says a lot about human nature.
The book is a fast paced overview of the rise to power and the turning point into decline and exile. Much focus is on the political gamesmanship that went on. Not as much coverage over the historic battles that led to his pinnacle of power and ultimate defeat.
The unnerving aspect on conclusion is that on death in exile and his triumphant return to France for enshrined burial he is once again raised to hero stature in the eyes of the French. A man who cost so many so much and the price paid in lives lost is a sad testimony indeed, and unfortunately we see this played out in political leadership to this day.
December 15, 2017
This book was disappointing on several levels. First and foremost, if you are looking for insight into Napoleon's genius as a military strategist and tactician you will not find it here. The author devotes few words and little effort to explaining Napoleon's battles and military campaigns. Austerlitz gets a paragraph. The invasion of Russia gets only a few pages. Waterloo is the only battle which he discusses extensively, but that explanation suffers from the book's 2nd major flaw--there are no maps whatsoever. The third flaw is much more general: the author assumes that the reader has a familiarity with the history of France, because he comments on events preceding Napoleon's rise and following his fall without ever summarizing what those events were. For example, the author repeatedly refers to the Jacobins and the leaders of the French Revolution without ever explaining who they were or what they did. On the other hand, the author does a good job of explaining the political landscape during Napoleon's tenure as leader of France, and the chapters on his exiles to the islands of Elba and Saint Helena were very good and quite enlightening. But I wanted a better understanding of what made Napoleon such a legendary figure, and I didn't get it.
August 29, 2025
Når man kun har læst en biografi om Napoleon, så bliver det ikke en “sammenlignende” anmeldelse, men jeg har fra først til sidst været godt underholdt og kan så bare konstatere, at Napoleon Boneparte har oplevet så meget i sit 52 årige liv, at der sagtens kunne skrives et 12 bindsværk over hans liv og karriere. Det er vel nærmest svært at overvurdere den mands betydning for Europas historie. Forfatteren er historiker og teksten er hm i bedste fald akademisk, meget koncentrer og så fremstår den massiv, fordi der ikke er gjort plads til indrykning og afsnit. Men det er formentlig mere forlaget end forfatterens afgørelse. Heldigvis er der blevet plads til nogle sider med billede - ofte malerier og tableauer fra de mange store slag. Og så er det i øvrigt en smuk bog fra Informations forlag, og efter min forsigtige vurdering efterlades læseren helt uden “hvide områder” i den omfattende historie, der ender i Longwood på Sankt Helena den 5. maj 1821.
July 31, 2023
This is an excellent biography of Napoleon Bonaparte, the tyrant that terrorized Europe and treated his own soldiers as expendable for his own ego and place in history. The author covers Napoleon's early life on Corsica, his personality, his politics, and his military acumen. The book is a fair account that treats its subject with the scholarship that it deserves. The author focuses in particular on Napoleon's use of propaganda and perception management to augment his power and his legacy as a conqueror. I look forward to reading other biographies of the Corsican autocrat who took France, and Europe, by storm. But this book stands out to me as well-written, sharp, and bereft of the mythology that has surrounded Napoleon for two centuries.
January 3, 2020
This is a great introduction to Napoleon, or a good review of the key events for someone already somewhat familiar with the Napoleonic Empire. I read it over the holidays as some light revision for a class I am taking.
The chapters are reasonably short, so it’s very easy to pick it up for a quick read in between doing other tasks.
I liked the way the author used the repatriation of Napoleon’s body as a framing device for the entire book - I also particularly enjoyed the final couple of chapters which started to dig into the propaganda and myth-making surrounding Bonaparte’s life and accomplishments.
The chapters are reasonably short, so it’s very easy to pick it up for a quick read in between doing other tasks.
I liked the way the author used the repatriation of Napoleon’s body as a framing device for the entire book - I also particularly enjoyed the final couple of chapters which started to dig into the propaganda and myth-making surrounding Bonaparte’s life and accomplishments.
March 29, 2020
A good book, well informed and easy to read despite its 400 pages it was enjoyable and pretty equidistant and realistic. I have given it only 4 stars because the writer is putting an accent more on the political and social part of the napoleon era than the military aspect of it. For example, the Russian Campaign has only 6 pages. In another context that wouldn't be a problem but Napoleon is first known to be a military leader. In the future, I would recommend putting more weight on the military aspect of his life. (Excuse my writings the English language is not my native language)
January 16, 2023
This book does a good job of detailing the events that shaped Napoleon, France, and Europe during and after the Revolution. There were some key insights into Napoleon's roots and his ambitions. He grabbed the reins to move France in a new direction and instilled a sense of duty to the nation. Napoleon's unrelenting conflict with England and war with Russia eventually led to his downfall and banishment from Europe. However, he left a lasting influence on France's psyche, culture, and legal system.
May 18, 2021
An enjoyable re-read. In fact there seem to be so many biographies of Napoleon, I clean forgot I had already been here.
I learnt at least 1 thing: a. Madame de Stael was the daughter of Necker - never imagined there was a connection, b. she and Napoleon had an ongoing feud. Don't think that counts as a spoiler.
As to my poor memory, I am fairly certain I have not yet touched the Roberts take - I own it (Kindle), so I'll get there at some point.
I learnt at least 1 thing: a. Madame de Stael was the daughter of Necker - never imagined there was a connection, b. she and Napoleon had an ongoing feud. Don't think that counts as a spoiler.
As to my poor memory, I am fairly certain I have not yet touched the Roberts take - I own it (Kindle), so I'll get there at some point.
November 10, 2023
I bought this book knowing it would be a very high level overview of Napoleon's life and that is exactly what it was. And on the basis, it was a great read. Obviously if you want a lot more detail on specific events, then you need other books. But this is perfect for anyone taking a casual interest in Napoleon.
August 20, 2018
Compelling narrative. Forrest highlights the myth of the emperor and the potency of this throughout 19th century France. Personally would have liked to have seen more of a breakdown of Napoleon as a tactician in war and combat. Nevertheless, the account has ignited interested.
September 3, 2018
Well researched and written book about one of the world’s more fascinating figures. Parallels to modern times abound, such as wanting to the censor the press, presenting military defeat in Egypt as victory, relentless propaganda and an utter lack of regard for democracy or individual rights. Forest’s analysis is clear, his command of the historical chronology drives the narrative.
October 15, 2021
Maybe a little closer to 3.5. I would have benefited from a more thorough grounding in French Revolution history…a topic I have only very little familiarity with. That said, it was an interesting quick high level overview. And a good introduction into what has become the napoleonic legacy.
August 24, 2022
Definitely a good intro into Napoleon, but very surface level and does not spend too much given time on any one topic/event. Events which could have complete books written about them were limited to a few paragraphs. Nevertheless, gives a useful overview of Napoleon’s life, roots, and legacy
January 29, 2023
Am fost puțin dezamăgit de lipsa detaliilor în ceea ce privește desfășurarea bătăliilor purtate de Napoleon, sau chiar a aspectelor militare ale perioadei în general. Totuși, cartea este ceea ce se doreste a fi - o biografie.
July 19, 2024
Very dry, no humor or excitement. All essay, no stories. (One great story about Napoleon's first exile.) I did learn some interesting things and filled in cultural gaps about Napoleon and France in the late 18th/early 19th century.
May 9, 2017
This book took me a long time to read as I have dipped in and out for a while. It is quite a dry history of Napoleon but it is well written and researched.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews