Dünya tarihinin en büyük komutanlarını tüm yönleriyle inceleyen OSPREY Büyük Komutanlar Serisi, Napoléon Bonaparte ile devam ediyor… Korsika adasında orta karar bir ailenin oğlu olarak doğan ve Fransa’ya ayak bastığında pek de parlak bir konuma sahip olmayan genç Napoléon o günlerde Fransa İmparatoru olup İspanya’dan Rusya’ya kadar Avrupa’nın büyük bir kısmına hükmedeceğini düşünmüş müdür? Bunun cevabını bilemeyeceğiz ancak Fransız İhtilali’nin keşmekeşinden sıyrılıp karşısına çıkan fırsatları son derece iyi kullanması, sergilediği beceriler sayesinde rütbe basamaklarını hızla tırmanması ve çok genç yaşta çok önemli mevkilere ulaşması bu yolun taşlarını döşedi. Askerî kariyeri boyunca İtalya, Mısır, İspanya, Almanya, Polonya, Rusya ve Fransa gibi birbirinden son derece farklı coğrafyalarda yaklaşık 20 yıl boyunca seferler yürüten, elde ettiği zaferlerle tarihin en önde gelen komutanları arasında bile çok özel bir yere sahip olan Napoléon, bir kısmı siyasi bir kısmı ise askerî açıdan hayati sonuçlar doğuran yaklaşık 60 muharebede bulundu. Bu bakımdan modern Avrupa’nın kaderini tayin ettiğini ve savaşın kaidelerini temelden değiştirdiğini söylemek hiç de yanlış olmaz. Napoléon’un askerî kariyerine, uyguladığı stratejilere ve taktiklere odaklanan bu çalışma, sahip olduğu liderlik özelliklerini irdelemeyi de ihmal etmiyor. Dünya savaş tarihinde bir efsane olarak gösterilen Napoléon’un yıldızının hem nasıl parladığını hem de nasıl söndüğünü sıra dışı bir üslupla ortaya koyuyor. Kariyerinin en önemli muharebeleri olan Austerlitz, Borodino ve Waterloo ise bir belgesel havasında tüm detaylarıyla masaya yatırılıyor.
Dry and workman like, and lacking in insight. The author's bias is that Napoleon was a flawed military genius and an awful person. The former is little in doubt. The latter is more a result of the current vogue in scholarship where Napoleon is a villain. Such men conveniently ignore the fact that his enemies were just about always the ones who declared war on France, Spain being a tragic exception to the rule. Unsurprisingly, Napoleon's detractors in this regard can mostly be found in Britain, a nation that seems to think all of its past enemies were brutish and evil conquerors (Hitler being the only one who really fit that mold), even as Britannia ruled the largest empire known to man. Empires though are always founded on conquest. But to these men, Napoleon's conquests are somehow more "vile."
At any rate, anyone who calls the works of Charles Esdaile "superb" is committing a sin similar to the Napoleon worship of the 19th Century. I fear our hatred of Napoleon is in part a sign that we have lost our appreciation for the benefits of tumult and rapid change, mixed with the more laudable dislike we have for autocracy and militarism. Curiously, Napoleon is rarely condemned today for his turn to monarchy, something his 19th Century admirers had much more trouble with. Europe groaned under the dead hand of monarchy, and Napoleon had shown it was a sham with his victories, but as Stendhal noted, his personal embrace of monarchy also undid him. Why is the monarchy angle forgotten? Because in our age we fear dictators, not monarchs, and conflate Napoleon with Mussolini, instead of with Frederick the Great, much to our detriment.
Çok kısa ama öz bir biyografi olmuş. Yükselişinden itibaren, Waterloo savaşına kadar olan bölüm oldukça akıcı işlenmiş. Detaylı bir biyografi yerine sadece saha becerilerine bakmak için iyi bir kitap. Zaten seri büyük komutanlar serisi sadece bu alana fokuslanmış görünüyor.
A brief biography of Napoleon, I liked it but some elections of the rivals and battles to analyze are not really clear to me (no Archduke Charles, for example), and some of the battles of the 1814's campaign are missed which is odd. Good book in overall but nothing really "Wow"!
Kısa ve etkileyici bir biyografi olmuş. Tarihe mâl olmuş bir şahsiyeti güzel işlediği su götürmez bir gerçek. Ancak Napoleon gelmiş geçmiş en büyük komutan mıdır? Sanmam…
A rather poor, dry and derivative work, certainly not worth £11-99. There is nothing new here that is not better covered in major books at the same price. The special illustrations are also run-of-the-mill and give Napoleon a sour expression on each one! As for his analysis of other writers on the subject, his praise for Charles Esdaile is very misplaced as his book Napoleon's Wars is incredibly biased and one-sided. Neither of them mention Nelson's murder of prisoners of war at Naples in 1798, nor do they mention the hundreds of innocent Danish civilians killed by the British Navy in an unprovoked attack on Copenhagen in 1807 - an act of cynical aggression against a neutral country. Esdaile is a great mudslinger but a very poor historian.
Another Osprey book, this time from their 'Command' series. Napoleon Bonaparte is perhaps the best known general in Europe, and potentially the world coming to prominance during and after the French Revolution, amid fear from the Monarchies of Europe that this would spread to their countries.
Being Osprey it does focus on his military achievements (and later, failures) with occasional mentions of the situation in France (and Europe) at the time, but it certainly provided me with new information about Napoleon and his campaigns.
Whether you believe the narrative that he was saviour of post-revolutionary France who attacked others in Europe to save the country, or a warmonger who wanted to take the opportunity to expand France (or the grey inbetween!) this is a good read. More narrative based, than an 'academic' title this makes it a simple read as well.
Solid addition to the Osprey series, "Leasdership, Strategy, Conflict." Here, we read of Napoleon Bonaparte. Ther book is part biography and part military history. We learn of Naoleon's military training, his early career, his role with the Revolutionary forces, his advancement--and his eventual accession as emperor. Also told is the story of his campaigns and key battles.
There are many nice illustrations, including useful maps (although sometimes the print is a bit small for my eyes!). The book concludes by considering his key antagonists, such as Wellington and Katusov. Then, an examination of his accomplishments--and his weaknesses.
All told, a solid albeit very brief introduction to Napoleon. . . .