What do you think?
Rate this book
Napoleon
In Napoleon, National Book Award winner J. Christopher Herold tells the fascinating story of a legendary leader who changed the world in every aspect - political, cultural, military, and commercial. Napoleon Bonaparte's rise from common origins to the pinnacle of power, as well as his defeat at Waterloo, still influences our daily lives, from the map of Europe to the metric system. Here's the fascinating story of the great soldier-statesman.
468 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 21, 2015
90 people are currently reading
148 people want to read
About the author
J. Christopher Herold
12 books17 followersJ. Christopher Herold (1919-December 10, 1964) was born in Czechoslovakia of Austrian parents. The family moved to Germany in 1939, and shortly afterwards Herold emigrated to the United States.
Herold received a Bachelor of Science degree in political science from Columbia University. Fluent in 6 languages, he served with Army intelligence in World War II. After the war, he became assistant editor at Columbia University Press, and later editor-in-chief at the Stanford University Press.
Herold wrote a number of books on European history, such as “The Swiss Without Halos” (1948), “Joan, Maid of France” (1952), “The Mind of Napoleon” (1955), and “Mistress to an Age: A Life of Madame de Staël” (1958).
Herald died in New York at the age of 45.
Herold received a Bachelor of Science degree in political science from Columbia University. Fluent in 6 languages, he served with Army intelligence in World War II. After the war, he became assistant editor at Columbia University Press, and later editor-in-chief at the Stanford University Press.
Herold wrote a number of books on European history, such as “The Swiss Without Halos” (1948), “Joan, Maid of France” (1952), “The Mind of Napoleon” (1955), and “Mistress to an Age: A Life of Madame de Staël” (1958).
Herald died in New York at the age of 45.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
May 28, 2021
First, I really do not know much about this period, so I enjoyed the book.
Second, the book failed in the regards to the fact that it was more of a history than biography.
When I read biographies, I want to got into the title character more. This was a good overview of the period.
Second, the book failed in the regards to the fact that it was more of a history than biography.
When I read biographies, I want to got into the title character more. This was a good overview of the period.
August 1, 2023
Not a conventional biography but more an overview of the period with the focus on the man himself. Fast-paced & stronger on narrative than analysis but definitely worth a read.
May 21, 2025
This was an interesting snapshot of a different era of Napoleonic/European history scholarship. Published in 1963 by a Czech-American scholar from Columbia, this book outlines a brisk, relatively thorough overview of the “Age of Napoleon.”
The most interesting parts of the book are the portions covering North and South American colonial policy—which is somewhat amusing, given that Napoleon figures relatively little into the actual events of either continent, aside from the ancillary effects of his policies in the Old World affecting the reactive policies of the United States and Spanish jurisdiction in South/Central America.
The author clearly has a “bent” towards Napoleonic rule that he characterizes as dictatorial and self-aggrandizing. Napoleon the man, while displaying flashes of brilliance especially in war, is mostly grasping, brutish, driven to success primarily by luck—and Herold prefers to linger over his vices rather than his virtues
Herold’s perspective on European history is also colored by his positioning as a mid-20th century liberal American academician. He clearly finds most of 19tj-century continental European political arrangements incompetent and uneven at best and decadent and despotic at worst. Despite this, Napoleon’s regime is stoutly criticized for its centralized, dictatorial character—all its virtues and successes seem to be primarily inherited from the French Revolution. The Consulate nor Empire seems to impress Herold overmuch. He spends little time on the code Napoleon and doesn’t seem much interested in internal French administrative realignment—despite this being just as important (and more long-lasting) of a feat for the Napoleonic regime(s) as any military victory.
He treats the British with a very gentle touch. The war crimes of the Copenhagen bombing are only lightly commented upon; any cruelties in the Peninsular War seem to stem from the Spanish guerillas or greedy French forces; and he has an eye-roll inducing section where he basically says that the “noble lie” of the mythic British fortitude standing staunchly and bravely up against the continental system can now be dispensed with, because they’ve “proven such resilience” in the Second World War.
I agree with him that the continental system did not oppress the British as much as Churchill and other myth-spinning Brits would like us to agree. And I do agree that the British populace exhibit tremendous resilience against the Germans in WW2. BUT, I feel as if this section displays that Herold is fundamentally sympathetic with the British over against continental Europe during the Napoleonic wars. They’re invariably portrayed as even-handed and reasonable—while the wild, mercurial, even barbaric natures of the continental regimes (especially France, Prussia, and Russia) are highlighted constantly.
It’s okay for historians to have a perspective, but it’s funny to read an American carrying water so loyally for the British, when one would think the divide of the Atlantic would offer an American writer the ability to create some dispassionate distance between himself and all the players.
That said—perhaps I’m being overly harsh. He was writing in 1963, western Europe seemed to be moving towards unification under Anglo-American hegemony, any type of centralization outside of capitalist liberalism was deemed suspect, an ascendant Russian union was far more straightforwardly menacing than our complicated present, and he could still write with a straight face, as he does in this book: “Then, every foreign war undertaken by the United States has resulted in the expansion and solidification of its power and territory.”
So, all in all, an interesting snapshot of an era of European history-telling by an American. I think it demonstrates the struggle of much Anglophone (especially American) literature about the Napoleonic Wars—we’re simultaneously too close and too far from it, and we almost always think we were the good guys.
The most interesting parts of the book are the portions covering North and South American colonial policy—which is somewhat amusing, given that Napoleon figures relatively little into the actual events of either continent, aside from the ancillary effects of his policies in the Old World affecting the reactive policies of the United States and Spanish jurisdiction in South/Central America.
The author clearly has a “bent” towards Napoleonic rule that he characterizes as dictatorial and self-aggrandizing. Napoleon the man, while displaying flashes of brilliance especially in war, is mostly grasping, brutish, driven to success primarily by luck—and Herold prefers to linger over his vices rather than his virtues
Herold’s perspective on European history is also colored by his positioning as a mid-20th century liberal American academician. He clearly finds most of 19tj-century continental European political arrangements incompetent and uneven at best and decadent and despotic at worst. Despite this, Napoleon’s regime is stoutly criticized for its centralized, dictatorial character—all its virtues and successes seem to be primarily inherited from the French Revolution. The Consulate nor Empire seems to impress Herold overmuch. He spends little time on the code Napoleon and doesn’t seem much interested in internal French administrative realignment—despite this being just as important (and more long-lasting) of a feat for the Napoleonic regime(s) as any military victory.
He treats the British with a very gentle touch. The war crimes of the Copenhagen bombing are only lightly commented upon; any cruelties in the Peninsular War seem to stem from the Spanish guerillas or greedy French forces; and he has an eye-roll inducing section where he basically says that the “noble lie” of the mythic British fortitude standing staunchly and bravely up against the continental system can now be dispensed with, because they’ve “proven such resilience” in the Second World War.
I agree with him that the continental system did not oppress the British as much as Churchill and other myth-spinning Brits would like us to agree. And I do agree that the British populace exhibit tremendous resilience against the Germans in WW2. BUT, I feel as if this section displays that Herold is fundamentally sympathetic with the British over against continental Europe during the Napoleonic wars. They’re invariably portrayed as even-handed and reasonable—while the wild, mercurial, even barbaric natures of the continental regimes (especially France, Prussia, and Russia) are highlighted constantly.
It’s okay for historians to have a perspective, but it’s funny to read an American carrying water so loyally for the British, when one would think the divide of the Atlantic would offer an American writer the ability to create some dispassionate distance between himself and all the players.
That said—perhaps I’m being overly harsh. He was writing in 1963, western Europe seemed to be moving towards unification under Anglo-American hegemony, any type of centralization outside of capitalist liberalism was deemed suspect, an ascendant Russian union was far more straightforwardly menacing than our complicated present, and he could still write with a straight face, as he does in this book: “Then, every foreign war undertaken by the United States has resulted in the expansion and solidification of its power and territory.”
So, all in all, an interesting snapshot of an era of European history-telling by an American. I think it demonstrates the struggle of much Anglophone (especially American) literature about the Napoleonic Wars—we’re simultaneously too close and too far from it, and we almost always think we were the good guys.
December 15, 2017
Good overview of Napoleon and European history 1800-1821. Read as audio book. It was well read and interesting.
February 2, 2021
I have really no idea if what is stated in this book is an accurate depiction of the life of Napoleon. It did a great job at portraying what an absolute mad man ol' Nappy Boy was though, take that as you will. Solid biography in general, somewhat too detailed for my taste but you can't blame it for not going through it all.
March 12, 2024
If you want to know more about Napoleon Bonaparte this a short informative history of a megalomaniac.
July 22, 2015
I believe that there was an error in the download; the chapter about the colonial world was only 3 paragraphs long and presaged the next chapter about Napoleon's ill-fated attack on Russia. So the book is literally incomplete.
This history left me with an incomplete understanding of Napoleon. I cannot imagine the difficulty of writing about Bonaparte and his world in a single history. Not only was Napoleon's life full of incident, but there are so many others--Tsar Alexander, Wellington and Nelson, Talleyrand, Fouche, the various German, Austrian, and Prussian princes, many of Napoleon's family members--who have to be captured and explained. Unfortunately, Herold does not succeed with any of them. For example, he gives short shrift to the complexities of post-Revolution France; before reading this book, I didn't know much about the Directorate, and I still don't understand how Napoleon rose to power during it and became Consul. I don't understand how figures like Fouche and Talleyrand worked with and against Napoleon. Herold does very little to elucidate the man; he spends almost no time on Napoleon's relationship with Josephine, and, after the early chapter on his years in Corsica, little on his relationship with the rest of the family, except to state, without explanation, that the family feared Napoleon. I also don't have a clear sense of Napoleon's contributions to European society and politics; after all, this the man who inspired/promoted the Civil Code, which persisted, in various forms, after his fall. But there's no discussion of the impact of the Code or other administrative reforms.
It's clear that Herold wants to dismantle the legend, but, in doing so, he fails to explain how Napoleon did what he did. Many of Napoleon's victories come off as being shams or serendipitous. That seems unlikely, given the breadth of Napoleon's military achievements. And Napoleon clearly had a keen political mind, or he would not have lasted as long as he did, engaged in almost-constant warfare on behalf of a country that was not his. But Herold doesn't show how Bonaparte remained in power (indeed, Herold spends more time depicting frequent bouts of disloyalty that never achieve their aim of overthrowing Bonaparte than he does showing the alliances that kept Napoleon in power).
I don't need a biography to lionize Napoleon, but I do want one that recognizes his strengths, as well as his weaknesses, and can make a plausible case for why Napoleon achieved what he did. This isn't it.
This history left me with an incomplete understanding of Napoleon. I cannot imagine the difficulty of writing about Bonaparte and his world in a single history. Not only was Napoleon's life full of incident, but there are so many others--Tsar Alexander, Wellington and Nelson, Talleyrand, Fouche, the various German, Austrian, and Prussian princes, many of Napoleon's family members--who have to be captured and explained. Unfortunately, Herold does not succeed with any of them. For example, he gives short shrift to the complexities of post-Revolution France; before reading this book, I didn't know much about the Directorate, and I still don't understand how Napoleon rose to power during it and became Consul. I don't understand how figures like Fouche and Talleyrand worked with and against Napoleon. Herold does very little to elucidate the man; he spends almost no time on Napoleon's relationship with Josephine, and, after the early chapter on his years in Corsica, little on his relationship with the rest of the family, except to state, without explanation, that the family feared Napoleon. I also don't have a clear sense of Napoleon's contributions to European society and politics; after all, this the man who inspired/promoted the Civil Code, which persisted, in various forms, after his fall. But there's no discussion of the impact of the Code or other administrative reforms.
It's clear that Herold wants to dismantle the legend, but, in doing so, he fails to explain how Napoleon did what he did. Many of Napoleon's victories come off as being shams or serendipitous. That seems unlikely, given the breadth of Napoleon's military achievements. And Napoleon clearly had a keen political mind, or he would not have lasted as long as he did, engaged in almost-constant warfare on behalf of a country that was not his. But Herold doesn't show how Bonaparte remained in power (indeed, Herold spends more time depicting frequent bouts of disloyalty that never achieve their aim of overthrowing Bonaparte than he does showing the alliances that kept Napoleon in power).
I don't need a biography to lionize Napoleon, but I do want one that recognizes his strengths, as well as his weaknesses, and can make a plausible case for why Napoleon achieved what he did. This isn't it.
February 9, 2018
I listened to the audiobook version of this biography of Napoleon Bonaparte.
I have only learned about the life of Napoleon through the lens of his influence on world events and of brief descriptions of his career and life. As a result, this is first serious foray into learning about him. That being said, it was a great introduction to his life and times. Unlike other biographies, Christopher Herold spends more time around Napoleon's actions and the events going on during these turbulent times then on the man himself. I didn't mind this as I find the entire period absolutely fascinating.
If you were interested in a more in depth look at the man behind the legend, this would not be the book for you. If you are interested in the legend of Napoleon and learning about the impact of this one man on history, it would be a great place to start.
Napoleon was born a middle class Corsican and through his brilliant and audacious actions became the king of France and completely dominated Europe for about a decade and a half. He in many ways was the result of the French Revolution and the culmination of the enlightenment. At the time, he was seen as an oppressive tyrant, but his legend grew by the failures of the Bourbon restoration after his reign.
Bonaparte brought Europe kicking and screaming into the modern age, establishing the balance of powers that created the entangling alliances which brought the world headfirst into WW1. He also sold the United States the Louisiana purchase, which is the world's biggest real estate deal, and something which we owe him a debt of gratitude for. Anyone learning about his life must be awed by his force of character and determination. He is truly one of the world's great men, and I'm grateful for the author for helping me learn about him.
I have only learned about the life of Napoleon through the lens of his influence on world events and of brief descriptions of his career and life. As a result, this is first serious foray into learning about him. That being said, it was a great introduction to his life and times. Unlike other biographies, Christopher Herold spends more time around Napoleon's actions and the events going on during these turbulent times then on the man himself. I didn't mind this as I find the entire period absolutely fascinating.
If you were interested in a more in depth look at the man behind the legend, this would not be the book for you. If you are interested in the legend of Napoleon and learning about the impact of this one man on history, it would be a great place to start.
Napoleon was born a middle class Corsican and through his brilliant and audacious actions became the king of France and completely dominated Europe for about a decade and a half. He in many ways was the result of the French Revolution and the culmination of the enlightenment. At the time, he was seen as an oppressive tyrant, but his legend grew by the failures of the Bourbon restoration after his reign.
Bonaparte brought Europe kicking and screaming into the modern age, establishing the balance of powers that created the entangling alliances which brought the world headfirst into WW1. He also sold the United States the Louisiana purchase, which is the world's biggest real estate deal, and something which we owe him a debt of gratitude for. Anyone learning about his life must be awed by his force of character and determination. He is truly one of the world's great men, and I'm grateful for the author for helping me learn about him.
May 10, 2017
A brisk biography as well as an overview of the Napoleonic era. Herold moves swiftly from event to event as he's not concerned much with psychology, motives, and interpretation. You're not going to hear too much about Napoleon, the Man.
This may be because the book was written fifty to sixty years (the author died in 1964)- despite the book's 2015 publication date. Herold, though, may never have intended to spend much time on background context or the psychology of Napoleon.
I enjoyed the pacing but, I'll admit, I did already know a little something about Napoleon and the chronology of events, from Bonaparte's early days to his ascendancy that I didn't mind not learning more of the scheming that led to his gaining power or the details of European power politics.
You'll get a good overview of Napoleon and his military and political strategy but very little about the context of why he, France, and Europe did what they did. It's not a bad thing; especially if you're already somewhat familiar with some aspects of the era.
This may be because the book was written fifty to sixty years (the author died in 1964)- despite the book's 2015 publication date. Herold, though, may never have intended to spend much time on background context or the psychology of Napoleon.
I enjoyed the pacing but, I'll admit, I did already know a little something about Napoleon and the chronology of events, from Bonaparte's early days to his ascendancy that I didn't mind not learning more of the scheming that led to his gaining power or the details of European power politics.
You'll get a good overview of Napoleon and his military and political strategy but very little about the context of why he, France, and Europe did what they did. It's not a bad thing; especially if you're already somewhat familiar with some aspects of the era.
June 10, 2018
~3.5 stars
It's fun to read - mainly because it's one of the very few books on Napoleon (& his epoch) that do not act as an uncritical tribute to the Emperor - quite the contrary: author pinpoints many of Bonaparte's mistakes, criticises some of his reforms, openly smashes his efforts to elevate his whole family to the ruling caste across the whole of Europe & even ... questions his military genius, debating about the role of propaganda and luck in building the myth of invincible Napoleon.
It's all good, I don't take it personally when someone tries to debunk Bonaparte's eternal monument, but the book is far too brief & shallow for someone truly interested in the epoch - it may be fine for average American who has barely any clue about the history of Europe, but I've expected much more.
It's fun to read - mainly because it's one of the very few books on Napoleon (& his epoch) that do not act as an uncritical tribute to the Emperor - quite the contrary: author pinpoints many of Bonaparte's mistakes, criticises some of his reforms, openly smashes his efforts to elevate his whole family to the ruling caste across the whole of Europe & even ... questions his military genius, debating about the role of propaganda and luck in building the myth of invincible Napoleon.
It's all good, I don't take it personally when someone tries to debunk Bonaparte's eternal monument, but the book is far too brief & shallow for someone truly interested in the epoch - it may be fine for average American who has barely any clue about the history of Europe, but I've expected much more.
December 8, 2021
Really entertaining and readable biography of Napoloen. The book aims to give an overview to the spirit of ideas at the time, as well as the man himself. Thanks to him, I got a real good idea on how his dominance of Europe led to the Romantic Revolution. He attempted to portray himself as bringing reason and light to all of Europe. While he did liberate Europe from tyrannical kings and "rationalized" laws, he created resentment based on being a tyrannical leader himself. That, plus the excesses of the French Revolution led a reaction that would explore more the feelings as part of reason.
The chapter on why he invaded Russia was also eye opening. He knew full well the risks going in, but figured he could still defeat the Russian army, retire for the winter, and then come back. Too much hesitation, plus decline of his foremost abilities led himself to the famous catastrophe.
The chapter on why he invaded Russia was also eye opening. He knew full well the risks going in, but figured he could still defeat the Russian army, retire for the winter, and then come back. Too much hesitation, plus decline of his foremost abilities led himself to the famous catastrophe.
May 14, 2024
This rating/review is about the overall experience of reading this book. (I’d give the book itself ⭐️⭐️⭐️)
Herold treats Napoleon as a powerful political pebble, structuring his biography around the concentric ripples of his military conquests. Though the author’s negative—or at least skeptical—bias toward Bonaparte is evident throughout, it paired nicely with the much more favorable stories woven masterfully by Dr. Brian Crispell while driving from battlefield to battlefield, monument to monument across Europe. This audiobook served to fill in the gaps of silent bus travel in between.
Herold treats Napoleon as a powerful political pebble, structuring his biography around the concentric ripples of his military conquests. Though the author’s negative—or at least skeptical—bias toward Bonaparte is evident throughout, it paired nicely with the much more favorable stories woven masterfully by Dr. Brian Crispell while driving from battlefield to battlefield, monument to monument across Europe. This audiobook served to fill in the gaps of silent bus travel in between.
July 14, 2023
This biography reads like a story and I found that extremely compelling. This is a shorter Napoleon biography than others I've read, but it's a very effective overview of history. It never gets bogged down in uninteresting obscure details. I also particularly enjoyed the exploration into how Napoleon influenced global politics in a way we still experience today. There are many interesting passages about other foreign leaders and analysis of political uprisings.
December 10, 2021
I liked it quite a lot. My one small gripe is that the author constantly made it very obvious that he really disliked Napoleon. While I don't think that a biographer has to like the subject of their book, it made me wonder if some of the conclusions drawn might be colored by the author's strong feelings.
December 9, 2023
This is a brisk trot through Napoleon's life. It has to keep moving to get through so much in a modest number of pages which keeps things from bogging down. However, I would have liked a bit more detail about the way the battles played out. This book does have some of that, but the book is probably more balanced whereas my interests are somewhat skewed toward the battles.
February 3, 2024
A good general overview of Napoleon's life and times, but my main criticism of this is the same as my main criticism of the recent Ridley Scott film - that it jumps around too quickly and, at the end, you are still not left with a real sense of who Napoleon was.
July 31, 2024
I’m not usually a biography person, but this was legitimately really interesting. I’m not sure if it was the writing, the narrator, or both, but it also had a touch of snark and sarcasm that were so funny.
October 14, 2024
This book reviews the life and battles of Napoleon who is perhaps history’s greatest military leader. His success as a commander did not translate to happiness. This is the tale of his unbelievable accomplishments wed to his astounding failures.
November 23, 2021
I appreciate the examination of Napoleon’s relationships with his wives, his frenemies, his military heads, etc. One of the best I’ve read so far.
January 7, 2023
A decent biography but with a lot of Napoleonic history of the politics involved
December 6, 2023
Turns out the book was about some French guy and not a High School student with freakin’ sweet dance moves. But the French guy also had a pretty interesting life.
December 18, 2023
I was stoked for the film...
January 22, 2024
Well written but I wanted more insight into Napoleon's non-military / personal life.
January 7, 2025
I still don't fully understand Napoleon or the Napoleonic era. I hold the author 50% responsible.
August 28, 2025
Lots of history.
November 25, 2025
DNF. 70% of the audiobook. It was good. But at the end it became less about Napoleon and more about other characters.
August 9, 2023
what I like of this book is that it Provides the reader clear and detailed context of the life, situation and mentality of napoleon, France, countries, rulers and populations affected by napoleon actions.
June 22, 2015
I found this book to be a great catch-up on world history during the of Napoleon's rise and fall of his empire. While it is not a biography of Napoleon, it is an excellent description of the years following the French Revolution. Like any history of this time, glimpses of happenings in the United States of America are revealed. I found the tumult and the corruption of Monarch's in Europe and Russia in desperate need of reform. Napoleon was a force to be reckoned with and his ego certainly as large as his empire, in fact, larger as he invades Russia as a stepping stone to both India and China. His theory that while England ruled the seas her army was to small to interfere with his growth. His ambitions were not limited by thought of a threat from England but what he failed to consider were England's back door diplomacy and her ability to sign on allies. Had he been a bit more capable of seeing the facts as England did, he might never have been beaten by Wellington at Waterloo. Given the slight mistakes he made in relying on one of his generals, he would have been on his way to re-securing his empire to that of before his thrashing in Russia.
His actions after leaving his exile in Elba caused France to lose even more territory than after the Russian defeat. After Waterloo, he became a prisoner of England confined to St Helena Island, a possession of Great Britain, until his death from Cancer.
I found much to admire about Napoleon as well as much to detest. He allowed Europe to view itself in the absence of Monarchs, aside from himself as Emperor. He attempted to unify Europe with his continental system of blocking out English trade but this built up resentments by the people and eventually encouraged uprisings and eventual defeat of this seemingly megalomaniac conqueror. Many governments and thinkers of the times referred to as the anti-Christ.
This was a short read but yet easy to follow and a great re-cap of forgotten World History). At least for me). I gave this work four stars and I would recommend reading this work on Kindle.
His actions after leaving his exile in Elba caused France to lose even more territory than after the Russian defeat. After Waterloo, he became a prisoner of England confined to St Helena Island, a possession of Great Britain, until his death from Cancer.
I found much to admire about Napoleon as well as much to detest. He allowed Europe to view itself in the absence of Monarchs, aside from himself as Emperor. He attempted to unify Europe with his continental system of blocking out English trade but this built up resentments by the people and eventually encouraged uprisings and eventual defeat of this seemingly megalomaniac conqueror. Many governments and thinkers of the times referred to as the anti-Christ.
This was a short read but yet easy to follow and a great re-cap of forgotten World History). At least for me). I gave this work four stars and I would recommend reading this work on Kindle.
May 21, 2016
What took you so long.
The last part of this book was great. It looked back at Bonaparte's career and made sense of it by looking forward at the legend. Frankly the first 95% could have been cut dramatically. It was neither a brilliant detailed report on what, how, with whom and why nor was it the lead in to the brilliant summation. This flash of perspective made the first 95% almost worth the labor. Important personalities appeared as out of nowhere, and then disappeared again. But the ending, ah the ending, was magnifique.
The last part of this book was great. It looked back at Bonaparte's career and made sense of it by looking forward at the legend. Frankly the first 95% could have been cut dramatically. It was neither a brilliant detailed report on what, how, with whom and why nor was it the lead in to the brilliant summation. This flash of perspective made the first 95% almost worth the labor. Important personalities appeared as out of nowhere, and then disappeared again. But the ending, ah the ending, was magnifique.
September 21, 2016
History Enlarged
Herold's story gives me a different perspective on the?life of Napoleon. He seems much more the opportunist than the conquering hero of France. I thoroughly enjoyed this account.
Herold's story gives me a different perspective on the?life of Napoleon. He seems much more the opportunist than the conquering hero of France. I thoroughly enjoyed this account.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews