What do you think?
Rate this book
The Eagle in Splendour: Napoleon I and His Court
Discover the man behind the legend in this first book in English to take a look inside the court of Napoleon
Napoleon’s military conquests changed the world and dominate most portraits of him, but it was through the splendour of his court - more extravagent even than that of the Sun King - that Napoleon governed his empire. His palaces at Saint-Cloud and the Tuileries were the centres of his power, the dazzling reflection of the greatest empire in modern European history.
Using the unpublished papers of the Emperor’s leading courtiers, and his second Empress Marie Louise, Philip Mansel brings to life the intoxicated world and sheds light on the man behind the legend; the mistresses; the hierarchy and class structure he craved; his relationship with his family; his rude behaviour to ambassadors; his insecurities. Mansel illuminates the nature of a personality that conquered half the world yet, in the end, was “devoured by ambition”, abandoned by his courtiers, leaving behind him a country smaller and weaker than he found it.
Napoleon’s military conquests changed the world and dominate most portraits of him, but it was through the splendour of his court - more extravagent even than that of the Sun King - that Napoleon governed his empire. His palaces at Saint-Cloud and the Tuileries were the centres of his power, the dazzling reflection of the greatest empire in modern European history.
Using the unpublished papers of the Emperor’s leading courtiers, and his second Empress Marie Louise, Philip Mansel brings to life the intoxicated world and sheds light on the man behind the legend; the mistresses; the hierarchy and class structure he craved; his relationship with his family; his rude behaviour to ambassadors; his insecurities. Mansel illuminates the nature of a personality that conquered half the world yet, in the end, was “devoured by ambition”, abandoned by his courtiers, leaving behind him a country smaller and weaker than he found it.
256 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1987
3 people are currently reading
70 people want to read
About the author
Philip Mansel
33 books67 followersPhilip Mansel is a historian of courts and cities, and of France and the Ottoman Empire. He was born in London in 1951 and educated at Eton College, where he was a King’s Scholar, and at Balliol College, Oxford, where he read Modern History and Modern Languages. Following four years’ research into the French court of the period 1814-1830, he was awarded his doctorate at University College, London in 1978.
His first book, Louis XVIII, was published in 1981 and this - together with subsequent works such as The Court of France 1789-1830 (1989), Paris Between Empires 1814-1852 (2001) - established him as an authority on the later French monarchy. Six of his books have been translated into French.
Altogether Philip Mansel has published eleven books of history and biography, mainly relating either to France or the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East: Sultans in Splendour was published in 1988, Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire 1453-1924 in 1995 and Levant: Splendour and Catastrophe on the Mediterranean in 2010.
Over the past 30 years he has contributed reviews and articles to a wide range of newspapers and journals, including History Today, The English Historical Review, The International Herald Tribune, Books and Bookmen, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent and Apollo. Currently he writes reviews for The Spectator, Cornucopia, The Art Newspaper and The Times Literary Supplement.
In 1995 Philip Mansel was a founder with David Starkey, Robert Oresko and Simon Thurley of the Society for Court Studies, designed to promote research in the field of court history, and he is the editor of the Society’s journal. The Society has a branch in Munich and is linked to similar societies in Versailles, Madrid, Ferrara and Turin.
He has travelled widely, lecturing in many countries - including the United States, France, Germany, Italy and Turkey - and has made a number of appearances on radio and television, including in the two-part Channel 4 documentary “Harem” and in two BBC2 documentaries on Versailles in 2012. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, the Royal Society of Literature, the Institute of Historical Research (University of London) and the Royal Asiatic Society, and is a member of the Conseil Scientifique of the Centre de Recherche du Chateau de Versailles. In 2010 Philip Mansel was appointed Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres and in 2012 was the recipient of the annual London Library Life in Literature Award.
Philip Mansel wrote the introduction to the 2012 re-issue of Nancy Mitford’s The Sun King and is currently working on his own biography of Louis XIV. His short history of Aleppo: Rise and Fall of a World City is scheduled for publication in April 2016. His book on Napoleon and his court, The Eagle in Splendour, was republished by I. B. Tauris in June 2015.
In 1995 Philip Mansel started a campaign to save Clavell Tower, a ruined folly of 1831 which threatened to fall over the cliff above Kimmeridge Bay. This led, in 2007-8, to the Tower’s deconstruction, relocation, reconstruction, restoration and modernisation by the Landmark Trust. Clavell Tower is now the Trust’s most popular property.
Philip Mansel lives in London, travelling to Paris, Istanbul and elsewhere for research, conferences and lectures. He also runs the family estate at Smedmore, near Wareham in Dorset. For more information on this historic house, visit the web site and read the recent articles published in The World of Interiors and Country Life.
His first book, Louis XVIII, was published in 1981 and this - together with subsequent works such as The Court of France 1789-1830 (1989), Paris Between Empires 1814-1852 (2001) - established him as an authority on the later French monarchy. Six of his books have been translated into French.
Altogether Philip Mansel has published eleven books of history and biography, mainly relating either to France or the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East: Sultans in Splendour was published in 1988, Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire 1453-1924 in 1995 and Levant: Splendour and Catastrophe on the Mediterranean in 2010.
Over the past 30 years he has contributed reviews and articles to a wide range of newspapers and journals, including History Today, The English Historical Review, The International Herald Tribune, Books and Bookmen, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent and Apollo. Currently he writes reviews for The Spectator, Cornucopia, The Art Newspaper and The Times Literary Supplement.
In 1995 Philip Mansel was a founder with David Starkey, Robert Oresko and Simon Thurley of the Society for Court Studies, designed to promote research in the field of court history, and he is the editor of the Society’s journal. The Society has a branch in Munich and is linked to similar societies in Versailles, Madrid, Ferrara and Turin.
He has travelled widely, lecturing in many countries - including the United States, France, Germany, Italy and Turkey - and has made a number of appearances on radio and television, including in the two-part Channel 4 documentary “Harem” and in two BBC2 documentaries on Versailles in 2012. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, the Royal Society of Literature, the Institute of Historical Research (University of London) and the Royal Asiatic Society, and is a member of the Conseil Scientifique of the Centre de Recherche du Chateau de Versailles. In 2010 Philip Mansel was appointed Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres and in 2012 was the recipient of the annual London Library Life in Literature Award.
Philip Mansel wrote the introduction to the 2012 re-issue of Nancy Mitford’s The Sun King and is currently working on his own biography of Louis XIV. His short history of Aleppo: Rise and Fall of a World City is scheduled for publication in April 2016. His book on Napoleon and his court, The Eagle in Splendour, was republished by I. B. Tauris in June 2015.
In 1995 Philip Mansel started a campaign to save Clavell Tower, a ruined folly of 1831 which threatened to fall over the cliff above Kimmeridge Bay. This led, in 2007-8, to the Tower’s deconstruction, relocation, reconstruction, restoration and modernisation by the Landmark Trust. Clavell Tower is now the Trust’s most popular property.
Philip Mansel lives in London, travelling to Paris, Istanbul and elsewhere for research, conferences and lectures. He also runs the family estate at Smedmore, near Wareham in Dorset. For more information on this historic house, visit the web site and read the recent articles published in The World of Interiors and Country Life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
June 17, 2016
This book is an absolute treasure when it comes to researching not just Napoleon's domestic court but also the way he held (and used) court when he was outside of France. I tend to spend more time studying the wider Bonaparte family as opposed Napoleon himself so I was particularly pleased with Mansel's inclusion of a chapter focusing entirely on the courts developed by Napoleon's brothers and sisters in various areas of Europe. As a source for details this book cannot disappoint as it is a veritable handbook to How Napoleon Did Things from etiquette to titles to clothing. When it comes to personalities Mansel (in my opinion) falters a bit as I found myself questioning his broad statements about certain figures and cannot say I agree with some pronouncements he made about Napoleon and those closest to him. However, this did not detract from the extreme value this book achieves by synthesizing important information about Napoleon's use of ceremony, splendor, dress, and etiquette as a means of legitimizing a new regime and reestablishing the power of a monarchy in post-revolution France.
July 20, 2016
Napoleon’s style of monarchy surrounded the Emperor with an aura of splendour, and this is one reason why he has won so many passionate admirers.
For many, Napoleon’s appeal was magical rather than rational.
The uniforms, the music, the grandiose ceremonies, the bowing princes and chamberlains, the incredible palaces, the ubiquitous N’s and bees –in other words the court –contributed to the magic surrounding the Emperor.
This book is backed full of information and gives a wonderful view and understanding of France during napoleons time.
It is very dense, since there is a lot of information packed in not even 300 pages of book, but even for being so slam packed full of detailed info, this book is pretty easy to read.
I think it is definelty a must read, if you are interested in napoleon, France or anything in between those two!
*thanks to NetGalley, the publishers and the author for providing me with a free ecopy of this book in exchange for a free and honest review.*
October 1, 2025
A very delightful and interesting book on Napoleon looking at via his Court - easy to dismiss as a trifle but Napoleon constructed his court with great deliberation. The frills were for a purpose And Mansel is fascinating guide to tis aspect of his life.
January 2, 2023
Very poor book . Disjointed prose that goes on without any real purpose . The authors overall thesis and evaluation of Napoleons character are fuelled by unfounded and unexplained claims . By all means have a disdain for Napoleon but please elaborate your claims more clearly and precisely . A flick through the bibliography shows many sources from the Victorian era , seems the author is picking and choosing his proofs for his ire .
The book looks at the court and consequently napoleons character without considering much else outside of it which I find quite unfair . Mansel would do well to compare the way napoleon treats court in comparison with military and administrative regard. It is like viewing the napoleonic era through a key hole , one is not getting a full picture .
My main gripe is Mansel mistaking napoleons humour for rudeness and elitism . It seems Mansel as a court historian cannot come to grips with a soldier ruling nobles than nobles ruling soldiers . A strangely aristocratic and snobbish take on events for a 21st century historian ! Mansel can’t come to grips with napoleons meritocracy.
Another observation Is how many of the reviewers on both here and Amazon are friends of Mansel or have been given the book for free in exchange for a review .
The book also contradicts itself with accounts of contemporaries, for example in one chapter Mansel will talk of many of the adoring servants the emperor had in his court and then towards the end sprinkle in some libels from a page or chambermaid and ultimately side with the latter as opposed to the former and declare the court miserable .
Mansel makes the ridiculous claim Paris was never enthusiastic about the emperor ( p.160 ) yet 1 million Parisians attended his repatriation. Paris was certainly enthusiastic, common sense tells us so as well as most manuscripts.
he tries to paint napoleon as an autocratic power hungry despot , but shuns all his work as a product of the enlightenment ( getting rid off serfdom , religious reforms , code napoleon , abolishing the inquisition etc. )
He disregards les cases work and presents its image of Napoleon as a fantasy yet it was the best selling work of the century and widely accepted by all those who knew him in the years following 1822 .
Most of his sources stem form pro bourbon sycophants publishing memoirs after the restoration no doubt for advancement within that court and schemers like Talleyrand .
He is completely out of his depth discussing napoleons campaigns . Never mentioning the breach of treaties the Russians and Austrians made , the continental system etc . He makes the unbelievable claim that most french men saw Austria as the height of lawful order or something akin when hundreds of thousands of french men fought for the revolution and against Austria .
He seems to be one who regards the revolution and napoleonic regime as an illegal detour due to the Ill-bred nature of those in-charge and the large spread meritocracy.
The Bonapartes or at least napoleon never thought of themselves as the ‘ the bourbons of Corsica ‘ many anecdotes and other sources tell us this .
The whole narrative is confused , disjointed and plainly false .
He represents the brave soldiers of France as chattels serving a slave master . Claims napoleon never exposed himself to danger or the hardship of his troops . Skips over Alexander burning Moscow etc etc . What a simplistic view of history , such lies are common place perhaps under the press machine of Britain in the 1810s but for a historian ? No wonder this book was so cheap . Claims also that Bonaparte was not loved by his populace unlike Alexander , Francis etc . Do I need remind the author of the propaganda the Russians told about napoleon being the anti christ , the way they butchered their men at borodino , Smolensk ? Or how about the fact they were feudal serfs? Would the men of the revolution enlightened as they were consign themselves to a despotic monarch as the author states .
I am surprised he has such audacity to make these claims.
What about British impressment , Spanish inquisitions , Austrian scheming at the expense of their citizens . What enlightened benevolent men these allied monarchs were !
I could go on and on about how his claims of las cases memoirs reshaping the emperors character and image but I digress . Overall too opinionated and willing to disregard the whole picture to be taken as a serious work of history
The book looks at the court and consequently napoleons character without considering much else outside of it which I find quite unfair . Mansel would do well to compare the way napoleon treats court in comparison with military and administrative regard. It is like viewing the napoleonic era through a key hole , one is not getting a full picture .
My main gripe is Mansel mistaking napoleons humour for rudeness and elitism . It seems Mansel as a court historian cannot come to grips with a soldier ruling nobles than nobles ruling soldiers . A strangely aristocratic and snobbish take on events for a 21st century historian ! Mansel can’t come to grips with napoleons meritocracy.
Another observation Is how many of the reviewers on both here and Amazon are friends of Mansel or have been given the book for free in exchange for a review .
The book also contradicts itself with accounts of contemporaries, for example in one chapter Mansel will talk of many of the adoring servants the emperor had in his court and then towards the end sprinkle in some libels from a page or chambermaid and ultimately side with the latter as opposed to the former and declare the court miserable .
Mansel makes the ridiculous claim Paris was never enthusiastic about the emperor ( p.160 ) yet 1 million Parisians attended his repatriation. Paris was certainly enthusiastic, common sense tells us so as well as most manuscripts.
he tries to paint napoleon as an autocratic power hungry despot , but shuns all his work as a product of the enlightenment ( getting rid off serfdom , religious reforms , code napoleon , abolishing the inquisition etc. )
He disregards les cases work and presents its image of Napoleon as a fantasy yet it was the best selling work of the century and widely accepted by all those who knew him in the years following 1822 .
Most of his sources stem form pro bourbon sycophants publishing memoirs after the restoration no doubt for advancement within that court and schemers like Talleyrand .
He is completely out of his depth discussing napoleons campaigns . Never mentioning the breach of treaties the Russians and Austrians made , the continental system etc . He makes the unbelievable claim that most french men saw Austria as the height of lawful order or something akin when hundreds of thousands of french men fought for the revolution and against Austria .
He seems to be one who regards the revolution and napoleonic regime as an illegal detour due to the Ill-bred nature of those in-charge and the large spread meritocracy.
The Bonapartes or at least napoleon never thought of themselves as the ‘ the bourbons of Corsica ‘ many anecdotes and other sources tell us this .
The whole narrative is confused , disjointed and plainly false .
He represents the brave soldiers of France as chattels serving a slave master . Claims napoleon never exposed himself to danger or the hardship of his troops . Skips over Alexander burning Moscow etc etc . What a simplistic view of history , such lies are common place perhaps under the press machine of Britain in the 1810s but for a historian ? No wonder this book was so cheap . Claims also that Bonaparte was not loved by his populace unlike Alexander , Francis etc . Do I need remind the author of the propaganda the Russians told about napoleon being the anti christ , the way they butchered their men at borodino , Smolensk ? Or how about the fact they were feudal serfs? Would the men of the revolution enlightened as they were consign themselves to a despotic monarch as the author states .
I am surprised he has such audacity to make these claims.
What about British impressment , Spanish inquisitions , Austrian scheming at the expense of their citizens . What enlightened benevolent men these allied monarchs were !
I could go on and on about how his claims of las cases memoirs reshaping the emperors character and image but I digress . Overall too opinionated and willing to disregard the whole picture to be taken as a serious work of history
February 9, 2021
I found this book a little hard to rate. On one hand it has some quite original and fresh insight into the Napoleonic enigma as to the nature of the man and the regime, but yet it does this both well and inadequately at the same time.
The main idea is that building an imperial court (a body wholly centred around a monarch) was in its own right a means of securing power. It centred the focus of influential people on the person of Napoleon basically as sycophants and made his rule personal rather than bureaucratic or representative. It was interesting to see how court officials subsumed the authority and function of ministers of state. This alone was thought provoking e.g. making more puzzling (irrelevant!) than ever the appointment of Davout as minister of war during the 100 days for example. The downside of this power structure was alienation from both the people and the institutions which might have strengthened the regime ultimately. Napoleon himself of course is confirmed as a megalomaniac.
There is a fair bit of comparison with (and not a little material drawn from) the courts of Louis XVI and Louis XVIII; plus that of Napoleon III. It seems Mansel is primarily a 'court' historian rather than a Napoleonic historian. So this is his unique perspective to enlighten us, but also the weakness of the overall book. Frankly there are just too many disconnected names of courtiers, many of which are too unfamiliar from other more 'institution' focused Napoleonic histories, such that it is hard to keep track or get to know them. At least a good few needed to be fleshed out in more detail rather than merely a mini bio at best. Also the book is rather too free with the gossipy accusation of immorality in whatever form.
Partly because of this and also because there really isn't a lot of superstructure built up around the core argument; overall this is a valuable thesis but not really a proven case.
The main idea is that building an imperial court (a body wholly centred around a monarch) was in its own right a means of securing power. It centred the focus of influential people on the person of Napoleon basically as sycophants and made his rule personal rather than bureaucratic or representative. It was interesting to see how court officials subsumed the authority and function of ministers of state. This alone was thought provoking e.g. making more puzzling (irrelevant!) than ever the appointment of Davout as minister of war during the 100 days for example. The downside of this power structure was alienation from both the people and the institutions which might have strengthened the regime ultimately. Napoleon himself of course is confirmed as a megalomaniac.
There is a fair bit of comparison with (and not a little material drawn from) the courts of Louis XVI and Louis XVIII; plus that of Napoleon III. It seems Mansel is primarily a 'court' historian rather than a Napoleonic historian. So this is his unique perspective to enlighten us, but also the weakness of the overall book. Frankly there are just too many disconnected names of courtiers, many of which are too unfamiliar from other more 'institution' focused Napoleonic histories, such that it is hard to keep track or get to know them. At least a good few needed to be fleshed out in more detail rather than merely a mini bio at best. Also the book is rather too free with the gossipy accusation of immorality in whatever form.
Partly because of this and also because there really isn't a lot of superstructure built up around the core argument; overall this is a valuable thesis but not really a proven case.
September 6, 2022
The king of Spain refused to come to the king of Rome's christening because Napoleon said he wasn't allowed a chair with armrests.
Quality content in here
Quality content in here
July 17, 2015
Actual rating: 3,5/5 stars
"One of the main differences between the court of Napoleon I and others is that his court was a conscious creation of the monarch's will. It was not the product of centuries of traditions and accumulated "rights". It was formed at the beginning of the nineteenth century and all its officials were selected, often to their own surprise, by the Emperor himself. Thus the court reveals as much about the Emperor's character as it does about the society of his day. It shows how the greatest genius to sit on a throne interpreted his role as a monarch." (S. 29f.)
If someone expects a rough insight in Napoleon’s court he has to look out for a different book. This one is complex, seriously researched for and incredibly well thought-out so that it is not suitable as a parallel read.
Against the background of Napoleon’s biography in seven chapters one gets to know what it was all about the institution „court“ and what was special about Napoleon’s. The members are scrutinized as well as their relationships to each other and to the Emperor, but also the different interests, the court’s political function, the other Bonaparte courts for comparison and much more. The text is supported by commented pictures and quotes. The former show different buildings, e.g. Napoleon’s numerous palaces, or people and events mentioned in the text so that you can take a break by looking at them and better process the information this way. A myriad of quotes by contemporary witnesses immensely contribute to the illustration of the facts. It has to be said, also, that it is a good thing to have basic French skills since you stumble upon a lot of expressions in this language which can supposedly be confusing if you do not have an idea what they might mean.
You easily notice the book was not written for everyone. It is an advantage to bring along some knowledge about Napoleon and his reign otherwise some connections could be inscrutable. This does not apply for the whole book but the author makes it clear it is addressed to readers who want to deal with the subject seriously. A proof by itself is the fact there are suitable numbers for all facts and topics which are used frequently and generously. The amount of names is almost bigger. There are incredibly many persons who play a role and at some point I could not distinguish one from the other any more, except for Napoleon’s family members. Yet all the princes, dukes, ladies and others as well as the numbers made the reading very difficult for me. If the author Régine Pernoud rings a bell for anyone they might vaguely know what I am talking about. She also likes to use innumerable names which have sometimes brought me to despair. Likewise, the reading process of "The Eagle in Splendour" turned out to be particularly tenacious but I am sure for the right reader (for example a historian) this book has to be of inestimable value.
But I also know Mansel can write differently. There are countless passages which I considered to be great since he expresses his thoughts in a way you can easily follow them and he shows more than tells. What is matching the seriousness of this work is the clear structure which is intended to support the reading and indeed helps to conquer rather dull parts.
All in all, I can tell I collected a lot of fresh knowledge from the book. I found Mansel's theses about the court’s function and its collapse as well as about the discrepancy between Napoleon’s relative unpopularity during his lifetime and the large acknowledgment after his death especially thrilling. Besides, the author always presents subjects from different perspectives so that you do not stay focused on one point of view. I noticed I had a very inaccurate view on Napoleon and now I am happy for having been enlightened. This means I can look forward to compare the acquired knowledge with information on topic presented in other books.
To sum up:
A not so easily readable piece of literature with a countless amount of information which should be really interesting for experts but for the first approach to the topic it is rather unsuitable.
"One of the main differences between the court of Napoleon I and others is that his court was a conscious creation of the monarch's will. It was not the product of centuries of traditions and accumulated "rights". It was formed at the beginning of the nineteenth century and all its officials were selected, often to their own surprise, by the Emperor himself. Thus the court reveals as much about the Emperor's character as it does about the society of his day. It shows how the greatest genius to sit on a throne interpreted his role as a monarch." (S. 29f.)
If someone expects a rough insight in Napoleon’s court he has to look out for a different book. This one is complex, seriously researched for and incredibly well thought-out so that it is not suitable as a parallel read.
Against the background of Napoleon’s biography in seven chapters one gets to know what it was all about the institution „court“ and what was special about Napoleon’s. The members are scrutinized as well as their relationships to each other and to the Emperor, but also the different interests, the court’s political function, the other Bonaparte courts for comparison and much more. The text is supported by commented pictures and quotes. The former show different buildings, e.g. Napoleon’s numerous palaces, or people and events mentioned in the text so that you can take a break by looking at them and better process the information this way. A myriad of quotes by contemporary witnesses immensely contribute to the illustration of the facts. It has to be said, also, that it is a good thing to have basic French skills since you stumble upon a lot of expressions in this language which can supposedly be confusing if you do not have an idea what they might mean.
You easily notice the book was not written for everyone. It is an advantage to bring along some knowledge about Napoleon and his reign otherwise some connections could be inscrutable. This does not apply for the whole book but the author makes it clear it is addressed to readers who want to deal with the subject seriously. A proof by itself is the fact there are suitable numbers for all facts and topics which are used frequently and generously. The amount of names is almost bigger. There are incredibly many persons who play a role and at some point I could not distinguish one from the other any more, except for Napoleon’s family members. Yet all the princes, dukes, ladies and others as well as the numbers made the reading very difficult for me. If the author Régine Pernoud rings a bell for anyone they might vaguely know what I am talking about. She also likes to use innumerable names which have sometimes brought me to despair. Likewise, the reading process of "The Eagle in Splendour" turned out to be particularly tenacious but I am sure for the right reader (for example a historian) this book has to be of inestimable value.
But I also know Mansel can write differently. There are countless passages which I considered to be great since he expresses his thoughts in a way you can easily follow them and he shows more than tells. What is matching the seriousness of this work is the clear structure which is intended to support the reading and indeed helps to conquer rather dull parts.
All in all, I can tell I collected a lot of fresh knowledge from the book. I found Mansel's theses about the court’s function and its collapse as well as about the discrepancy between Napoleon’s relative unpopularity during his lifetime and the large acknowledgment after his death especially thrilling. Besides, the author always presents subjects from different perspectives so that you do not stay focused on one point of view. I noticed I had a very inaccurate view on Napoleon and now I am happy for having been enlightened. This means I can look forward to compare the acquired knowledge with information on topic presented in other books.
To sum up:
A not so easily readable piece of literature with a countless amount of information which should be really interesting for experts but for the first approach to the topic it is rather unsuitable.
July 17, 2015
The Eagle in Splendour by Philip Mansel. Napoleon, his court and his monarchy.
Thanks to I.B Taurus for providing me with a free copy through Net Galley in exchange for an honest review.
Some historical figures have maintained a hold on people’s imagination for years. Napoleon is one of them. Mansel focuses on Napoleon’s court, its organisation, its style, its people, its excesses and its politics, to tell the story of Napoleon’s rise and fall. Despite Napoleon having started his military career under the auspices of the Revolution, he went on to create a monarchy. Mansel hypothesises (and makes a very good case) that his court was central to his success (and ultimately his failure), and the excesses that characterised such court (the palaces had to be bigger, the furniture more luxurious, the courtiers better dressed, the women prettier…) were an attempt at giving his endeavour a legitimacy that he felt he lacked, in comparison to other monarchs in Europe (and in France), who came from long dynasties of rulers.
The book discusses other aspects of Napoleon’s life, including his family, his conquests, his battles, his personal life, but always with a focus on the court. Such focus serves the story well, allowing us to get to know many of the main players, who they had been in previous governments, and what they did under Napoleon’s rule, and is peppered with quotes, that provide a more personal point of view and illuminate the character of Napoleon as seen by his courtiers.
The only issue I have with the book is that it is perhaps not best suited for a digital version. There were problems with the formatting of the version I had that I imagine won’t be present in the final version, like strange word divisions, accents out of place, etc. The wonderful images of course are not resizable and although I can adjust the size of the letters so that I can read without glasses, I needed my glasses to see the images well. Also, having all the notes at the back and not being able to follow a clickable link made them difficult to check. Perhaps a chart with the main players and how they connected to each other would also be helpful (especially if it could be linked to the names), more so at the beginning of the book when the reader is not yet familiar with everybody.
Although I haven’t read many books on Napoleon I felt that by the end of Mr Mansel’s book I knew the emperor and the man much better. I recommend this book to people who enjoy history and books about Napoleon in particular, and if you can, I’d suggest getting a paper copy as it might obviate some of the difficulties I found with the digital version.
Thanks to I.B Taurus for providing me with a free copy through Net Galley in exchange for an honest review.
Some historical figures have maintained a hold on people’s imagination for years. Napoleon is one of them. Mansel focuses on Napoleon’s court, its organisation, its style, its people, its excesses and its politics, to tell the story of Napoleon’s rise and fall. Despite Napoleon having started his military career under the auspices of the Revolution, he went on to create a monarchy. Mansel hypothesises (and makes a very good case) that his court was central to his success (and ultimately his failure), and the excesses that characterised such court (the palaces had to be bigger, the furniture more luxurious, the courtiers better dressed, the women prettier…) were an attempt at giving his endeavour a legitimacy that he felt he lacked, in comparison to other monarchs in Europe (and in France), who came from long dynasties of rulers.
The book discusses other aspects of Napoleon’s life, including his family, his conquests, his battles, his personal life, but always with a focus on the court. Such focus serves the story well, allowing us to get to know many of the main players, who they had been in previous governments, and what they did under Napoleon’s rule, and is peppered with quotes, that provide a more personal point of view and illuminate the character of Napoleon as seen by his courtiers.
The only issue I have with the book is that it is perhaps not best suited for a digital version. There were problems with the formatting of the version I had that I imagine won’t be present in the final version, like strange word divisions, accents out of place, etc. The wonderful images of course are not resizable and although I can adjust the size of the letters so that I can read without glasses, I needed my glasses to see the images well. Also, having all the notes at the back and not being able to follow a clickable link made them difficult to check. Perhaps a chart with the main players and how they connected to each other would also be helpful (especially if it could be linked to the names), more so at the beginning of the book when the reader is not yet familiar with everybody.
Although I haven’t read many books on Napoleon I felt that by the end of Mr Mansel’s book I knew the emperor and the man much better. I recommend this book to people who enjoy history and books about Napoleon in particular, and if you can, I’d suggest getting a paper copy as it might obviate some of the difficulties I found with the digital version.
July 15, 2015
This book differs from the ordinary because it gives a detailed description of Napoleon's court and how closely involved Napoleon was in the management and economics of his court. How he relied on the trapping of court to consolidate his power and manipulate those who served him.
The author shows a keen insight into the daily life of Napoleon and his insecurities, his personal relationships, and those of his family. The grandeur with which he lived was well detailed along with the reasons for it.
I found it very insightful as to the character and personality of the Emperor, and it certainly completes the picture of the man.
The author shows a keen insight into the daily life of Napoleon and his insecurities, his personal relationships, and those of his family. The grandeur with which he lived was well detailed along with the reasons for it.
I found it very insightful as to the character and personality of the Emperor, and it certainly completes the picture of the man.
August 20, 2015
I received this book in exchange for an honest review. I really liked this book. Historically it is very interesting and shows an insight into Napoleon that I had never heard. This is a perfect book for any history lover.
December 6, 2018
An interesting read! Not my usual faire but nonetheless interesting!
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews