What do you think?
Rate this book
The Illustrious Dead
“Gripping . . . a compelling story of personal hubris and humbling defeat.”—Jack Weatherford,author of the New York Times bestseller Genghis Khan and the Making of theModern World In a masterful dual narrative that pits the heights of human ambition and achievement against the supremacy of nature, New York Times bestselling author Stephan Talty tells the story of a mighty ruler and a tiny microbe, antagonists whose struggle would shape the modern world.In the spring of 1812, Napoleon Bonaparte was at the height of his powers. Forty-five million called him emperor, and he commanded a nation that was the richest, most cultured, and advanced on earth. No army could stand against his impeccably trained, brilliantly led forces, and his continued sweep across Europe seemed inevitable. Early that year, bolstered by his successes, Napoleon turned his attentions toward Moscow, helming the largest invasion in human history. Surely, Tsar Alexander’s outnumbered troops would crumble against this mighty force. But another powerful and ancient enemy awaited Napoleon’s men in the Russian steppes. Virulent and swift, this microscopic foe would bring the emperor to his knees. Even as the Russians retreated before him in disarray, Napoleon found his army disappearing, his frantic doctors powerless to explain what had struck down a hundred thousand soldiers. The emperor’s vaunted military brilliance suddenly seemed useless, and when the Russians put their own occupied capital to the torch, the campaign became a desperate race through the frozen landscape as troops continued to die by the thousands. Through it all, with tragic heroism, Napoleon’s disease-ravaged, freezing, starving men somehow rallied, again and again, to cries of “Vive l’Empereur!”Yet Talty’s sweeping tale takes us far beyond the doomed heroics and bloody clashes of the battlefield. The Illustrious Dead delves deep into the origins of the pathogen that finally ended the mighty emperor’s dreams of world conquest and exposes this “war plague’s” hidden role throughout history. A tale of two unstoppable forces meeting on the road to Moscow in an epic clash of killer microbe and peerless army, The Illustrious Dead is a historical whodunit in which a million lives hang in the balance.From the Hardcover edition.
206 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2009
115 people are currently reading
1174 people want to read
About the author
Stephan Talty
35 books294 followersStephan Talty is the New York Times bestselling author of six acclaimed books of narrative nonfiction, as well as the Abbie Kearney crime novels. Originally from Buffalo, he now lives outside New York City.
Talty began as a widely-published journalist who has contributed to the New York Times Magazine, GQ, Men’s Journal, Time Out New York, Details, and many other publications. He is the author of the forthcoming thriller Hangman (the sequel to Black Irish), as well as Agent Garbo: The Brilliant, Eccentric Double Agent who Tricked Hitler and Saved D-Day (2012) and Empire of Blue Water: Captain Morgan's Great Pirate Army, the Epic Battle for the Americas, and the Catastrophe that Ended the Outlaws Bloody Reign (2008).
His short e-book, The Secret Agent: In Search of America's Greatest World War II Spy was the best-selling Amazon Single of 2013.
Talty began as a widely-published journalist who has contributed to the New York Times Magazine, GQ, Men’s Journal, Time Out New York, Details, and many other publications. He is the author of the forthcoming thriller Hangman (the sequel to Black Irish), as well as Agent Garbo: The Brilliant, Eccentric Double Agent who Tricked Hitler and Saved D-Day (2012) and Empire of Blue Water: Captain Morgan's Great Pirate Army, the Epic Battle for the Americas, and the Catastrophe that Ended the Outlaws Bloody Reign (2008).
His short e-book, The Secret Agent: In Search of America's Greatest World War II Spy was the best-selling Amazon Single of 2013.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 141 reviews
June 13, 2015
I found this a very interesting look at what disease did to Napoleon’s Army during his invasion of Russia in 1812. Starting with how the discovery of the mass graves in Vilnius in 2010 piqued his interest, Mr. Talty looks at how disease in general and typhus in particular affected Napoleon’s army. In doing so, he takes on the common understanding that it was the cold of the Russian Winter that destroyed that army. His hypothesis is that disease had so weakened Napoleon’s Army that the cold of the retreat simply finished the job.
In addition to expounding on typhus, the author gives the reader a good overview of the Russian campaign itself. He looks at Napoleon’s preparations, composition of the Army, it’s commanders and their strengths and weaknesses, including Napoleon himself. He also does a good job of highlighting the battles of Smolensk and Borodino on the advance to Moscow as well as those on the retreat. His descriptions of the aftermath of the battles can be a little gruesome.
This book is full of facts about typhus itself, ie how it evolved, how it is passed, what it does to the body, etc. In telling about the effects of the disease, the author states some amazing statistics. For example, one week after crossing the Neman, his army of 450,000 front line troops, with another 150-200,000 second line troops, had already lost 300 men to disease with another 700 on the sick lists. By the time he captured Smolensk his front line strength was down to 200,000 and at Borodino Napoleon had appox 135,000 front line troops left. The vast majority of the losses were due to typhus/dysentery not combat.
When the decision was made to abandon Moscow the army was down to about 75,000 men, again most of the losses were mainly to disease, and the author does a good job of explaining how this limited Napoleon's options on routes to take on his retreat. Napoleon was felt he was so weak that he couldn’t risk a major battle. As a result he retreated through the wasteland that the route he used on his advance to Moscow. Mr. Talty again does a good job explaining the results of this decision on what was left of the army.
In describing the retreat, I felt the author did a good job of telling of the disintegration of the army and the effects of the cold on both men and the typhus bacteria. He also offers some gruesome insights to what happened to French prisoners – not a pleasant read.
In summary, Mr. Talty tells his story on two tracks. The first is what typhus is and what it did to Napoleon’s army. The second is a more conventional history of the invasion, ie what battles were fought, who fought them, the results of those battles and the political situation leading to and resulting from the invasion. I found this very fascinating read and rate it a solid 4 stars
In addition to expounding on typhus, the author gives the reader a good overview of the Russian campaign itself. He looks at Napoleon’s preparations, composition of the Army, it’s commanders and their strengths and weaknesses, including Napoleon himself. He also does a good job of highlighting the battles of Smolensk and Borodino on the advance to Moscow as well as those on the retreat. His descriptions of the aftermath of the battles can be a little gruesome.
This book is full of facts about typhus itself, ie how it evolved, how it is passed, what it does to the body, etc. In telling about the effects of the disease, the author states some amazing statistics. For example, one week after crossing the Neman, his army of 450,000 front line troops, with another 150-200,000 second line troops, had already lost 300 men to disease with another 700 on the sick lists. By the time he captured Smolensk his front line strength was down to 200,000 and at Borodino Napoleon had appox 135,000 front line troops left. The vast majority of the losses were due to typhus/dysentery not combat.
When the decision was made to abandon Moscow the army was down to about 75,000 men, again most of the losses were mainly to disease, and the author does a good job of explaining how this limited Napoleon's options on routes to take on his retreat. Napoleon was felt he was so weak that he couldn’t risk a major battle. As a result he retreated through the wasteland that the route he used on his advance to Moscow. Mr. Talty again does a good job explaining the results of this decision on what was left of the army.
In describing the retreat, I felt the author did a good job of telling of the disintegration of the army and the effects of the cold on both men and the typhus bacteria. He also offers some gruesome insights to what happened to French prisoners – not a pleasant read.
In summary, Mr. Talty tells his story on two tracks. The first is what typhus is and what it did to Napoleon’s army. The second is a more conventional history of the invasion, ie what battles were fought, who fought them, the results of those battles and the political situation leading to and resulting from the invasion. I found this very fascinating read and rate it a solid 4 stars
February 19, 2016
I did not enjoy this. Napoleon's invasion of Russia is very interesting and typhus is very interesting, but this book is under-reasoned and over-written.
To start with "over-written": holy crap. Anthropomorphize typhus once, yeah sure fine whatever. But Talty writes endlessly and repeatedly about the bacteria "planning" and how clever it was to choose lice as a vector, so much so that I became convinced that he forgot that the bacteria didn't choose anything, they don't collude; they're bacteria. And on that note, Talty: Rickettsia prowazekii is a bacteria that causes the disease typhus. Humans don't die of R. prowazekii (or "Rickettsia" as Talty insists inappropriately on calling it), they die of typhus; and typhus isn't alive, it's an illness resulting from infection. It's hard to take anything that pretends to be factual seriously when the author can't seem to take the trouble to understand the concepts he's writing about.
I have gotten side-tracked from the "over-written." There's a long setpiece after the Battle of Borodino about doctors performing amputations in field hospitals (which the author never bothers to link back to typhus), with descriptions of profiles being thrown onto walls by candlelight. Or at least, as Talty admits, they "would have been." ARGH. Don't make shit up just because you think it will sound cool! Go write a novel if that's what you wanted to do!
(And, I haven't checked if this already exists, but someone should absolutely write a novel about Prussian soldier Captain Röder, who is basically the hero of an adventure yarn as it is: the dude seems tough as nails, intelligent, romantic, pining, and beset by incident.)
As for reasoning, Talty admits that the French army surgeons didn't keep consistent records of the patients they treated, that they were unable to distinguish typhus from other febrile illnesses, that Napoleon didn't spend sufficient consideration on the extension of his supply lines so far into Russia, yet still somehow manages to attribute the death of everyone with a fever in Napoleon's army to typhus. After reading the book, I have the same conception of the situation that I had before: Napoleon's soldiers died of a lot of things in Russia, and one of them was typhus.
Talty also is seriously down on Kutuzov for abandoning Moscow to Napoleon, which seems like a stupidly misplaced criticism to me: after going on and on about how the Russians were out-fought by the French, and how costly and bloody and gruesome the battles were, why would Talty want Kutuzov to fight another? Instead the Russians lost buildings instead of thousands of human lives, and the French were unable to pursue the Russian army and were forced to retreat. Kutuzov's decision effectively ended the war: Napoleon left Russia, at great cost to himself and without gaining anything.
The... muddied logic? ignorance?... extends to the epilogue, which describes Charles Nicolle's work in Tunis where he identified the transmission method of typhus. Not to understate this enormous accomplishment, but that was all he did. He did not "isolate the pathogen" as Talty claims. I can't get over it. Talty describes Nicolle injecting a chimpanzee with blood from a human typhus patient, and then when the chimpanzee becomes ill, injecting a macaque with the chimpanzee's blood, and then when the macaque gets sick, Talty proclaims, "He had isolated the pathogen." Ugh. And then, when Nicolle injects two children with a mixture made of ground-up fleas from the macaque and the children fall ill but don't die, Talty announces, "The protocol was complete." ARGH. Ground-up fleas injected into two children are not a protocol! Charitably I assume Talty was eliding many steps in the process of medical research in order to make his story more digestible and, less forgivably, more dramatic, but this is a horrible thing to do; it's misleading at best, and dangerous when it convinces people to misunderstand vaccines or expect facile solutions to complex problems.
And this was the point at which I finally realized, too late, that this is not a history book; it's sensationalist journalism spun out to hundreds of pages.
To start with "over-written": holy crap. Anthropomorphize typhus once, yeah sure fine whatever. But Talty writes endlessly and repeatedly about the bacteria "planning" and how clever it was to choose lice as a vector, so much so that I became convinced that he forgot that the bacteria didn't choose anything, they don't collude; they're bacteria. And on that note, Talty: Rickettsia prowazekii is a bacteria that causes the disease typhus. Humans don't die of R. prowazekii (or "Rickettsia" as Talty insists inappropriately on calling it), they die of typhus; and typhus isn't alive, it's an illness resulting from infection. It's hard to take anything that pretends to be factual seriously when the author can't seem to take the trouble to understand the concepts he's writing about.
I have gotten side-tracked from the "over-written." There's a long setpiece after the Battle of Borodino about doctors performing amputations in field hospitals (which the author never bothers to link back to typhus), with descriptions of profiles being thrown onto walls by candlelight. Or at least, as Talty admits, they "would have been." ARGH. Don't make shit up just because you think it will sound cool! Go write a novel if that's what you wanted to do!
(And, I haven't checked if this already exists, but someone should absolutely write a novel about Prussian soldier Captain Röder, who is basically the hero of an adventure yarn as it is: the dude seems tough as nails, intelligent, romantic, pining, and beset by incident.)
As for reasoning, Talty admits that the French army surgeons didn't keep consistent records of the patients they treated, that they were unable to distinguish typhus from other febrile illnesses, that Napoleon didn't spend sufficient consideration on the extension of his supply lines so far into Russia, yet still somehow manages to attribute the death of everyone with a fever in Napoleon's army to typhus. After reading the book, I have the same conception of the situation that I had before: Napoleon's soldiers died of a lot of things in Russia, and one of them was typhus.
Talty also is seriously down on Kutuzov for abandoning Moscow to Napoleon, which seems like a stupidly misplaced criticism to me: after going on and on about how the Russians were out-fought by the French, and how costly and bloody and gruesome the battles were, why would Talty want Kutuzov to fight another? Instead the Russians lost buildings instead of thousands of human lives, and the French were unable to pursue the Russian army and were forced to retreat. Kutuzov's decision effectively ended the war: Napoleon left Russia, at great cost to himself and without gaining anything.
The... muddied logic? ignorance?... extends to the epilogue, which describes Charles Nicolle's work in Tunis where he identified the transmission method of typhus. Not to understate this enormous accomplishment, but that was all he did. He did not "isolate the pathogen" as Talty claims. I can't get over it. Talty describes Nicolle injecting a chimpanzee with blood from a human typhus patient, and then when the chimpanzee becomes ill, injecting a macaque with the chimpanzee's blood, and then when the macaque gets sick, Talty proclaims, "He had isolated the pathogen." Ugh. And then, when Nicolle injects two children with a mixture made of ground-up fleas from the macaque and the children fall ill but don't die, Talty announces, "The protocol was complete." ARGH. Ground-up fleas injected into two children are not a protocol! Charitably I assume Talty was eliding many steps in the process of medical research in order to make his story more digestible and, less forgivably, more dramatic, but this is a horrible thing to do; it's misleading at best, and dangerous when it convinces people to misunderstand vaccines or expect facile solutions to complex problems.
And this was the point at which I finally realized, too late, that this is not a history book; it's sensationalist journalism spun out to hundreds of pages.
June 29, 2025
If you would like some understanding of a pathogen that was stronger than any standing army since the Roman Empire, this book by Stephan Talty gives a good look.
"Typhus, above all, is a lover of war."
In 2001, a mass grave of 2000 skeletons was uncovered by accident in Lithuania.
Skeletons of soldiers of young robust men between the ages of 15 and 20 were found. No crushed skulls and no bullet holes. The regiment buttons found were of Napoleons 29th and 61st regiments.
Archeologists found evidence of the Typhus pathogen when drilling into the tooth pulp. This was the hidden killer that defeated Napoleons Grande Armee
and his hopes of world domination. The Lithuania mass grave was only the beginning.
Typhus is a group of infectious diseases caused by rickettsial organisms and spread to humans by fleas, lice, or chiggers. The three main types are murine, epidemic, and scrub typhus, each spread by different vectors.
Symptoms typically appear 1–2 weeks after exposure and include raging fever, blinding headache, back breaking muscle spasms and sometimes a rash.
Typhus spreads in unsanitary and crowded conditions, and historical epidemics have followed war, famine, and social upheaval.
Rickettsia prowazekii is the type of typhus that finally decimated Napoleon's army during their retreat from Russia in 1812.
This louse-borne disease spread rapidly among the soldiers due to unsanitary conditions and close quarters, significantly contributing to the army's downfall.
Napoleon had lost 300,000 men in his campaign in Spain in 1808. 100,000 died in battle. 200,000 died of Typhus.
The Grande Armée, upon entering Russia, numbered around 600,000 soldiers. By the time of the retreat, only a fraction of that number remained, with many succumbing to disease, including typhus.
The pain and suffering of this disease is unimaginable.
In closing, the author notes that although the Typhus "Rickettsia's" has been conquered by science after its 500-year rampage. It waits.
The pathogen has now been processed into powders and aerosols, giving the "Rickettsia" its only hope for a return to the wider world spread deliberately by enemies.
"It waits for what it has always waited for. War."
Five Stars
"Typhus, above all, is a lover of war."
In 2001, a mass grave of 2000 skeletons was uncovered by accident in Lithuania.
Skeletons of soldiers of young robust men between the ages of 15 and 20 were found. No crushed skulls and no bullet holes. The regiment buttons found were of Napoleons 29th and 61st regiments.
Archeologists found evidence of the Typhus pathogen when drilling into the tooth pulp. This was the hidden killer that defeated Napoleons Grande Armee
and his hopes of world domination. The Lithuania mass grave was only the beginning.
Typhus is a group of infectious diseases caused by rickettsial organisms and spread to humans by fleas, lice, or chiggers. The three main types are murine, epidemic, and scrub typhus, each spread by different vectors.
Symptoms typically appear 1–2 weeks after exposure and include raging fever, blinding headache, back breaking muscle spasms and sometimes a rash.
Typhus spreads in unsanitary and crowded conditions, and historical epidemics have followed war, famine, and social upheaval.
Rickettsia prowazekii is the type of typhus that finally decimated Napoleon's army during their retreat from Russia in 1812.
This louse-borne disease spread rapidly among the soldiers due to unsanitary conditions and close quarters, significantly contributing to the army's downfall.
Napoleon had lost 300,000 men in his campaign in Spain in 1808. 100,000 died in battle. 200,000 died of Typhus.
The Grande Armée, upon entering Russia, numbered around 600,000 soldiers. By the time of the retreat, only a fraction of that number remained, with many succumbing to disease, including typhus.
The pain and suffering of this disease is unimaginable.
In closing, the author notes that although the Typhus "Rickettsia's" has been conquered by science after its 500-year rampage. It waits.
The pathogen has now been processed into powders and aerosols, giving the "Rickettsia" its only hope for a return to the wider world spread deliberately by enemies.
"It waits for what it has always waited for. War."
Five Stars
December 8, 2014
This is a military/health book all wrapped into one. The author tells the story of Napoleon's ill-fated decision to attack Russia in 1812....not necessarily militarily ill-fated since he could well have won this war. But it was something else of which no one gave much thought, that doomed this foray from the beginning. It was not unknown since it had stalked armies for centuries but it was misidentified as death by starvation, overexposure, thirst, etc. But the source of this death was Rickettsia, commonly known as typhus and it was carried by the common body louse. Where better for this to attack than huge gatherings of military troops who wear the same clothing for months and hygiene is unknown?
Napoleon entered Russia with 600,000 members of the Grande Armee and staggered back to France with less than 100,000. Only a quarter of those lost were due to enemy action. The figures of those killed by typhus are hard to pin down since many deaths were attributed to "fever", but it has been estimated that it may have been as high as 350,000.
This is a fascinating history and holds the reader's interest throughout. Recommended.
Napoleon entered Russia with 600,000 members of the Grande Armee and staggered back to France with less than 100,000. Only a quarter of those lost were due to enemy action. The figures of those killed by typhus are hard to pin down since many deaths were attributed to "fever", but it has been estimated that it may have been as high as 350,000.
This is a fascinating history and holds the reader's interest throughout. Recommended.
July 5, 2009
This is an enjoyable and interesting book covering Napoleon's ill-fated 1812 campaign against Russia. The author offers the opinion that the invasion was doomed from the start due to the spread of Typhus throughout the troops of Napoleon's invading host. Its a good story covering the military aspects of the campaign along with some medical history thrown in. Overall it was an easy to read account full of interesting facts and stories from the participants and survivors from this massive human tragedy.
January 6, 2023
I am more convinced that our history education in school was so subpar. There is so much we didn't learn and there is so much to learn about. This was a great piece on the down fall of Napoleons grand army through a virus we rarely see today.
August 4, 2009
I am torn over this book. First, I enjoyed the interesting tidbits of the Grand Armee Napoleon assembled to invade Russia. The army was larger than the city of Paris, when it left France. Mr. Talty did a fine job explaining the complex politics of Napoleonic Europe, as well as the Byzantine politics of the Russian army. The battle scenes were epic and exciting reading, and the disease was eating the army by the thousands.
The ostensible subject of the book was typhus. He did discuss typhus some, and at first with a certain dramatic flair.
What bothered me, and it takes a lot to bother me in a non-fiction book, is a blatant mistake in facts. At the end of the book Talty says, "The freeing of the serfs and the toppling of the imperial system could have arrived a hundred years before they finally did...."
Wrong! If Napoleon was in Russia in 1812, it is not one hundred years to the year 1861 when the Serfs, were indeed emancipated by Tsar Alexander II. Further proof of date.
In a non fiction book, this is unacceptable.
The ostensible subject of the book was typhus. He did discuss typhus some, and at first with a certain dramatic flair.
The microbe that causes typhus--called Rickettsia prowazekii--is older than our understanding of disease allows. When it was born, the Europe that Napoleon had conquered didn't exist as a landmass. To get a fix on its origins, one must think in terms of geological epochs. page 101By page 110 you are back in battle, without much deeper of an understanding of the disease, except the symptoms, which are quite horrific.
What bothered me, and it takes a lot to bother me in a non-fiction book, is a blatant mistake in facts. At the end of the book Talty says, "The freeing of the serfs and the toppling of the imperial system could have arrived a hundred years before they finally did...."
Wrong! If Napoleon was in Russia in 1812, it is not one hundred years to the year 1861 when the Serfs, were indeed emancipated by Tsar Alexander II. Further proof of date.
In a non fiction book, this is unacceptable.
October 20, 2011
While the title led me to believe this would be more of a medical exploration of Napoleon's Grande Armee, it focuses far more on the battle tactics (or lack thereof) that led to the failure of his Russian Expedition. But this didn't prevent me from enjoying the book, although enjoy is a strange way to put it, especially since this book contains graphic accounts of many types of tragedies, from torture and battlefield slaughter to the misery and psychological torment of the diseased and survivors.
Talty is a good writer, and takes the time to explain some of the less-familiar terminology of war, as well as supplements his descriptions with battlefield maps for better navigation. His thesis states that Typhus and the unwillingness of Napoleon to bulk up his medical corps led to the downfall of the invasion of Russia. I'd disagree--there were many points at work in this, which Talty outlines deftly: ideological differences between the Russians and the Grande Armee on how to wage war, natural forces, lack of resources (especially food), and major tactical blunders and missed opportunities by Napoleon and his generals. In all of the book, typhus becomes a sideshow to the major carnage of war. I wish Talty had spent more time on the actual anatomical and physiological effects of the disease, and the medical thought of the time.
Overall a good book, but far more a book of military history than medical history.
Talty is a good writer, and takes the time to explain some of the less-familiar terminology of war, as well as supplements his descriptions with battlefield maps for better navigation. His thesis states that Typhus and the unwillingness of Napoleon to bulk up his medical corps led to the downfall of the invasion of Russia. I'd disagree--there were many points at work in this, which Talty outlines deftly: ideological differences between the Russians and the Grande Armee on how to wage war, natural forces, lack of resources (especially food), and major tactical blunders and missed opportunities by Napoleon and his generals. In all of the book, typhus becomes a sideshow to the major carnage of war. I wish Talty had spent more time on the actual anatomical and physiological effects of the disease, and the medical thought of the time.
Overall a good book, but far more a book of military history than medical history.
August 19, 2009
Talty makes a strong case for the role of typhus in Napolean’s failed 1812 invasion of Russia, but through his account, it’s actually quite apparent that the dominant factor in Napolean’s defeat was not disease but that he had vastly overextended his army and supply lines.
The French succumbed to typhus and other diseases, in part, because they were starving, without adequate clothing or shelter. For further evidence, see Talty’s description of the Imperial Army’s ruinous retreat to France. And, for the French, it didn’t help that the Russians were terribly ferocious combatants, preferring to burn Moscow rather than surrender it.
The medical history of typhus is certainly the strongest element of the book, and this is probably obvious, but I wouldn’t recommend this book as lunchtime reading. (I’m generally strong-stomached but at least one section made me positively queasy.) Talty doesn’t skimp on details of the ghoulish effects of typhus or, for that matter, the battlefield.
Did typhus set Napolean on a course that ended three years later at Waterloo? Probably not. But Talty presents some interesting theories here, and he does a rather good job of backing up his claims.
The French succumbed to typhus and other diseases, in part, because they were starving, without adequate clothing or shelter. For further evidence, see Talty’s description of the Imperial Army’s ruinous retreat to France. And, for the French, it didn’t help that the Russians were terribly ferocious combatants, preferring to burn Moscow rather than surrender it.
The medical history of typhus is certainly the strongest element of the book, and this is probably obvious, but I wouldn’t recommend this book as lunchtime reading. (I’m generally strong-stomached but at least one section made me positively queasy.) Talty doesn’t skimp on details of the ghoulish effects of typhus or, for that matter, the battlefield.
Did typhus set Napolean on a course that ended three years later at Waterloo? Probably not. But Talty presents some interesting theories here, and he does a rather good job of backing up his claims.
August 3, 2015
I wasn't as interested in The Illustrious Dead as I'd hoped I'd be. Having read and loved Steven Johnson's The Ghost Map, an account of how a relative layperson discovered the cause of cholera in Victorian London, I was hoping for a similarly exciting and scientific tale of disease. The Illustrious Dead can't quite decide whether it's an account of Napoleon's failed campaign in Russia or an exploration of the history of typhus. Clearly it was supposed to be both, but neither quite works. It was strange to hear blow-by-blow accounts of major battles among the scientific descriptions of what typhus does to the body.
It was interesting to hear Talty's refutation of the standard account of Napoleon's deadly retreat -- that 85% of his men had already died before he even began to retreat, and the vast majority of those from typhus. Although Talty obviously has an ax to grind, I found his argument convincing. And knowing little about Napoleon's invasion of Russia, I was interested to learn more about it.
It was interesting to hear Talty's refutation of the standard account of Napoleon's deadly retreat -- that 85% of his men had already died before he even began to retreat, and the vast majority of those from typhus. Although Talty obviously has an ax to grind, I found his argument convincing. And knowing little about Napoleon's invasion of Russia, I was interested to learn more about it.
June 15, 2015
Interesting, informative ... along with the horrifying images the writing generated, and appalling statistics of medical madness, I particularly appreciated Talty's depiction of Napoleon.
Quote: "The emperor rose from his desk and watched the city burn. To him, the blaze was a symbol of the utter foreignness of the Russian mind. 'It was the most grand, the most sublime, and the most terrific sight the world ever beheld!' he would later write. Torching one's own capital was something no Frenchman, not even Napoleon, could imagine; it was outside their psychological reach. The fact that the Russians had dared to do it elicited a certain horrified respect." ...
"But for Napoleon, it was the thing that tipped him into blazing anger and then depression. People who would burn their own city to the ground were clearly not prepared to negotiate. 'This forbodes great misfortune for us!' he said while watching the fires burn on ..."
Quote: "The emperor rose from his desk and watched the city burn. To him, the blaze was a symbol of the utter foreignness of the Russian mind. 'It was the most grand, the most sublime, and the most terrific sight the world ever beheld!' he would later write. Torching one's own capital was something no Frenchman, not even Napoleon, could imagine; it was outside their psychological reach. The fact that the Russians had dared to do it elicited a certain horrified respect." ...
"But for Napoleon, it was the thing that tipped him into blazing anger and then depression. People who would burn their own city to the ground were clearly not prepared to negotiate. 'This forbodes great misfortune for us!' he said while watching the fires burn on ..."
July 19, 2015
The Illustrious Dead is well written and completely absorbing, but somewhere along the line I missed the thesis of typhus being responsible for all of the devastation that was wrought. The author even says at one point that Napoleon seemed bored and tired during his Russian campaign, so I sort of had difficulty buying his later assertion that typhus changed the course of world history forever, Russian Revolution wouldn't have happened in the same way, France would still be in charge, etc etc. This is actually a better account of Napoleon's Russian ambitions in general, with a little typhus thrown in. The historical background of the disease and epilogue about how it was studied and used later were interesting, but it seemed strange to play it up as the book's main premise without getting into more detail, aside from disease symptoms and glimpses into army hospitals. Otherwise it's a really interesting read, it just might be a little disappointing depending on how strongly you were in it for the typhus.
January 19, 2016
In 1812 Napoleon invaded Russia backed by his 650,000 man Grande Armée, which was considered at the time to be one of the greatest fighting forces ever assembled. The crux of the conflict centered around which nation would control Poland. Seemingly, nothing could stand in the way of Napoleon’s advance. The Russians retreated again and again losing major battles at Smolensk and Borodino, eventually abandoning Moscow to Napoleon on September 14 setting fire to the city as they did so.
With his supply lines stretched thin, winter setting in and peace negotiations at a standstill, Napoleon found himself unable to press his campaign onward into the Russian capital of St. Petersburg and turned his troops for home. The Russian army harried his retreat, hampering progress and inflicting significant casualties. Between the constant attacks, the harshness of the Russian winter, disease and desertion the Grande Armée suffered uncountable hardships becoming drastically weakened. When Napoleon crossed the Breznia River into Belarus, only 27,000 soldiers remained. It is estimated that 400,000 of Napoleon’s men were killed in the campaign, one quarter from battle and three quarters from disease, exposure and starvation. A graphic dramatically illustrating the devastating effects of the war on Napoleon’s troops may be found here.
In The Illustrious Dead Talty contends that the deciding factor in Napoleon’s failure was due to the presence of typhus among his troops. Typhus is a louse borne bacteria that thrived in the close quarters of army encampments. Symptoms include high fever, chills, headache and a rash that spreads over the body with the exception of the face and hands. In the 1800’s, the disease typically killed about one third of the victims infected, however given the terrible physical conditions to which the Grande Armée was subject, the mortality among Napoleon’s army was likely far higher.
Though this wasn’t a topic I thought I’d be particularly interested in, Talty combines history and natural history of the Rickettsia bacteria to create a compelling, if rather grim, tale.
March 26, 2019
As soon as I saw this book I wanted to read it. I read War and Peace way back as a teenager, and fell in love with the story. A good part of that story is based on Napoleon's attempt to attack Moscow and then his retreat. I teach pathophysiology in college, so I'm always on the look out for good infectious disease stories, and this more than fit. You can never underestimate the stupidity of men when they have dreams of glory and especially to expand an empire. Napoleon should have quit while he was ahead. Instead of being happy with most of Europe, he wanted to try farther afield. Even more than today, he should have kept his eye not on Russia, but on disease passed by lice and mites and ticks, and bad water and bad food too. This book may seem a bit slow at first, but it catches fire after a while.
We are currently seeing the same thing again. Hitler also tried to go to Russia, and again the weather and Typhus botched his plans. We know Typhus exists in places where people cannot keep clean. Many think that typhus is a disease from the past, but there was a huge outbreak among the homeless in Lost Angeles last year. No matter how many times we have to remind people, infectious disease can make a fool out of your plans. Napoleon learned this the hard way...
We are currently seeing the same thing again. Hitler also tried to go to Russia, and again the weather and Typhus botched his plans. We know Typhus exists in places where people cannot keep clean. Many think that typhus is a disease from the past, but there was a huge outbreak among the homeless in Lost Angeles last year. No matter how many times we have to remind people, infectious disease can make a fool out of your plans. Napoleon learned this the hard way...
August 9, 2010
This book is an account of Napoleon’s Grand Army’s 1812 campaign into Russia. What this book throws into the story is the effect bacteria from the genus Rickettsia had on the outcome of the campaign and the future of world politics.
I enjoyed learning what the campaign was about, the day to day conditions of the soldiers during the march and during the battles, the political conditions of the world at the time, current military and medical practices used in those days, and many other nuggets of information the book provides. Part of the book is about Rickettsia and the disease typhus that they cause. The life/ disease cycles are covered, along with epidemiology of the disease moving through the army.
Talty’s summation of Napoleon’s demise is due to typhus moving through his army- killing as many as 5000 per day. This weakening of his forces changed the outcome of the battles, ultimately taking him out of the picture and changing the power structure of the world’s nations.
I enjoyed learning what the campaign was about, the day to day conditions of the soldiers during the march and during the battles, the political conditions of the world at the time, current military and medical practices used in those days, and many other nuggets of information the book provides. Part of the book is about Rickettsia and the disease typhus that they cause. The life/ disease cycles are covered, along with epidemiology of the disease moving through the army.
Talty’s summation of Napoleon’s demise is due to typhus moving through his army- killing as many as 5000 per day. This weakening of his forces changed the outcome of the battles, ultimately taking him out of the picture and changing the power structure of the world’s nations.
June 25, 2009
The author assumes that his readers have a large store of knowledge about Napoleon and his generals, and the ill-fated march on Russia. But surprisingly, the story of the events proves more interesting than remembering the generals' names. Human misery, caused mainly by ignorance, abounds. Nonetheless, the book is not that depressing if this intersection of disease and grand events interest you. But skip the page about how amputations were performed at the time--even more graphic than some Civil War material I have read.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 18, 2010
The author makes a compelling case that rampant Typhus was the cause of Napoleon's defeat in Russia, not the weather. If his army had not been racked by Typhus they would have had enough troops to destroy the Russians at Borodino and force the Tsar to sue for peace. The Russians were the last continental foe. Had Napoleon defeated them, the history of the 19th century would have been much different.
February 19, 2012
Amazing! Such a readable account of Napoleon's monomania and the the price paid by he and his armies in that pursuit. I have a geekish fascination with epidemiology and disease vectors, so I was fascinated by the author's recounting of the effect Typhus had on the campaigns. I don't however believe there is so much of that in this book that it would overshadow the story for anyone else.
October 9, 2011
Meh, this wasn't technical enough to please me from a medical/historical standpoint. It also tried for too much shock value. This book felt like an intro to invading Russia for men who still like to read comic books.
February 18, 2016
I'm probably the only person I know who would enjoy a book about Napoleon's army dying of Typhus during his last campaign. Having said that, I did enjoy it until the last 70 pgs or so when things just dragged out. Found myself skimming at that point.
September 23, 2014
Excellent study of the origins and spread of typhus and the role the disease has played in history, particularly its devastation of on the French army that invaded Russia in 1812. Highly recommended for serious students of history and the general reader as well.
October 11, 2014
Covers an aspect widely overlooked in other books. Well worth reading.
June 26, 2022
General Winter has been said to be the 'one' who actually defeated Napoleon when he invaded Russia but it was significantly assisted by Rickettsia prowazekii or as it is better known - typhus.
The book starts with an excavated construction site in Vilnius, Lithuania, in which thousands of human bones had been uncovered. Bones which were originally thought to be from Nazi extermination but were found to be older. From the early 19th century and local history pointed to the thousands of soldiers that were left behind as the Grande Armée marched towards Moscow and as the remains fled homeward.
The author focuses on the military campaign that brought thousands of men from across Europe into the area - not once, but twice - and Talty goes into detail of the military strategies as well as how the actions of the body louse (transmitter of typhus) decimated Napoleons forces. His anthropomorphizing of the louse's actions gets a little disturbing.
Admittedly, Napoleon was sure that Alexander would quickly sue for peace and he could then turn south for India (admittedly a straight-line distance of nearly 2700 miles through Russia, and the currently known countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan and finally India) where is army would break the back of English commerce. If his supply lines couldn't maintain themselves between France and Prussia, they certainly would be shattered and use more resources to get the supplies to the army than what was being delivered. So that's some delusion of his. Especially since it failed utterly.
A bare ten weeks into the campaign from the crossing of the River Nieman, as the army approached Borodino, disease had already taken 125,000 men. And it wasn't just typhus but also dysentery, pleurisy, jaundice, diarrhea, hepatitis ague and more. Napoleon just didn't believe that his army was being reduced by thousands nearly every day by sickness. And it seemed that Napoleon was also suffering some sort of vacillating mental state - instead of his known bold exploitation of an enemy's defensive position, he would issue orders sending in reserves and almost instantly rescind them, holding the reserve corps for later engagements.
As the decimated corps - it is estimated (there is some dispute on the actual numbers) of the 550,000 to 600,000 crossed into Russia that:
- about 100,000 were captured by Russians (about 20% were repatriated)
- of the 400-540,000 dead, less than 25% were from enemy action
Towards the end, it was a ghoulish version of 101 thig to do with a corpse which I am not going to repeat here. Just use your imagination and go about three steps beyond. Just- - ugh.
Admittedly, it was interesting overall. Napoleon's status as invincible was utterly shattered and this failed campaign led to many of his conquered states and allies breaking away. It was a year later that he was removed from the throne of France and exiled to Elba.
But I am disappointed that the author didn't go more into the discovery in Vilnius and what happened to the uncovered graveyards. Were they reburied? Sort of a problem for the company that owned the land and planned on constructing a building. Were they transplanted to another location? What other artifacts - besides bones - did they find?
For the connoisseur of French history, Russian history, Napoleon and/or basic early 19th century European history, it might give a few more insights but for the die-hard fa, likely nothing new here.
2022-140
The book starts with an excavated construction site in Vilnius, Lithuania, in which thousands of human bones had been uncovered. Bones which were originally thought to be from Nazi extermination but were found to be older. From the early 19th century and local history pointed to the thousands of soldiers that were left behind as the Grande Armée marched towards Moscow and as the remains fled homeward.
The author focuses on the military campaign that brought thousands of men from across Europe into the area - not once, but twice - and Talty goes into detail of the military strategies as well as how the actions of the body louse (transmitter of typhus) decimated Napoleons forces. His anthropomorphizing of the louse's actions gets a little disturbing.
Admittedly, Napoleon was sure that Alexander would quickly sue for peace and he could then turn south for India (admittedly a straight-line distance of nearly 2700 miles through Russia, and the currently known countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan and finally India) where is army would break the back of English commerce. If his supply lines couldn't maintain themselves between France and Prussia, they certainly would be shattered and use more resources to get the supplies to the army than what was being delivered. So that's some delusion of his. Especially since it failed utterly.
A bare ten weeks into the campaign from the crossing of the River Nieman, as the army approached Borodino, disease had already taken 125,000 men. And it wasn't just typhus but also dysentery, pleurisy, jaundice, diarrhea, hepatitis ague and more. Napoleon just didn't believe that his army was being reduced by thousands nearly every day by sickness. And it seemed that Napoleon was also suffering some sort of vacillating mental state - instead of his known bold exploitation of an enemy's defensive position, he would issue orders sending in reserves and almost instantly rescind them, holding the reserve corps for later engagements.
As the decimated corps - it is estimated (there is some dispute on the actual numbers) of the 550,000 to 600,000 crossed into Russia that:
- about 100,000 were captured by Russians (about 20% were repatriated)
- of the 400-540,000 dead, less than 25% were from enemy action
Towards the end, it was a ghoulish version of 101 thig to do with a corpse which I am not going to repeat here. Just use your imagination and go about three steps beyond. Just- - ugh.
Admittedly, it was interesting overall. Napoleon's status as invincible was utterly shattered and this failed campaign led to many of his conquered states and allies breaking away. It was a year later that he was removed from the throne of France and exiled to Elba.
But I am disappointed that the author didn't go more into the discovery in Vilnius and what happened to the uncovered graveyards. Were they reburied? Sort of a problem for the company that owned the land and planned on constructing a building. Were they transplanted to another location? What other artifacts - besides bones - did they find?
For the connoisseur of French history, Russian history, Napoleon and/or basic early 19th century European history, it might give a few more insights but for the die-hard fa, likely nothing new here.
2022-140
February 21, 2022
The Grande Armée vs. a Microbe!? Very enjoyable! A compelling argument sheds refreshing new light on an oft-told tale.
There are vast numbers of books on Napoleonic history, and a substantial number of those are about Boney's fatal misadventure into Russia, which, in certain respects, marked the high tide of his Imperial fortunes (or perhaps one should say ambitions?).
One of the things I like about this situation of super-abundance is that authors are frequently forced into choosing ever more specific corners of these epic conflicts, or new and different angles on them, in order to give their contribution to the crowded field any chance of gaining notice.
Talty's book on the massive much-covered 1812 campaign in Russia addresses the role Typhus played in the disintegration and obliteration (decimation is too weak a term, the ratio of losses being closer to 9:10 than 1:10) of the Grande Armée, the largest invasion force assembled, according to many, since Xerxes' legendary army.
Talty writes very well, and I love his book. I can imagine the more pedantic of Napoleonic buffs picking apart some of his specifics, but I think he gets the important stuff, and in particular the bigger picture, exceedingly well. Indeed, even though his harping on the theme of typhus could be potentially galling, one can't deny it's role, nor, as the book goes on, wonder why more attention hasn't been devoted to this aspect of the campaign before.
On first reading, when the jacket blurb suggests that herein Talty 'tells the story of a mighty ruler and a tiny microbe, antagonists whose struggle would shape the modern world', it can appear, to the seasoned reader of Napoleonic and 1812 literature, rather a ridiculous idea. But as yet bread this book, you realise it really isn't.
And for me, as a fairly avid reader of evolutionary literature, sparked by the 200th and 150th anniversaries of Darwin's birth and the publication of On The Origin Of The Species, to suddenly read stuff about the ancient prehistory of the planet in a book about the Napoleonic wars was certainly unprecedented and, frankly, rather wonderful.
I think Tolstoy would have applauded Talty's work, as it supports his view, as advanced in his masterwork, War & Peace, that so called 'Great Men' are in fact subject to forces both beyond their control and, as with Napoleon and Typhus, beyond their comprehension.
Whilst traditional military history buffs might quibble with occasional details regarding specific terms for details re uniforms, formations or technology, etc, I fervently hope most will see past such minutiae, and instead, as I did, find Talty's fluid and exciting narrative skills convincing. His descriptions of the actions at Smolensk and Borodino are amongst the clearest and most enjoyable (if, granted, not the most complete or detailed) I've read.
All in all, an excellent, enjoyable, quick and easy read, and a welcome plugging of a gap in our understanding of this much written about campaign, which succeeds in both finding a new and interesting angle of approach and retelling the familiar story in a vivid and compelling manner.
Excellent!
There are vast numbers of books on Napoleonic history, and a substantial number of those are about Boney's fatal misadventure into Russia, which, in certain respects, marked the high tide of his Imperial fortunes (or perhaps one should say ambitions?).
One of the things I like about this situation of super-abundance is that authors are frequently forced into choosing ever more specific corners of these epic conflicts, or new and different angles on them, in order to give their contribution to the crowded field any chance of gaining notice.
Talty's book on the massive much-covered 1812 campaign in Russia addresses the role Typhus played in the disintegration and obliteration (decimation is too weak a term, the ratio of losses being closer to 9:10 than 1:10) of the Grande Armée, the largest invasion force assembled, according to many, since Xerxes' legendary army.
Talty writes very well, and I love his book. I can imagine the more pedantic of Napoleonic buffs picking apart some of his specifics, but I think he gets the important stuff, and in particular the bigger picture, exceedingly well. Indeed, even though his harping on the theme of typhus could be potentially galling, one can't deny it's role, nor, as the book goes on, wonder why more attention hasn't been devoted to this aspect of the campaign before.
On first reading, when the jacket blurb suggests that herein Talty 'tells the story of a mighty ruler and a tiny microbe, antagonists whose struggle would shape the modern world', it can appear, to the seasoned reader of Napoleonic and 1812 literature, rather a ridiculous idea. But as yet bread this book, you realise it really isn't.
And for me, as a fairly avid reader of evolutionary literature, sparked by the 200th and 150th anniversaries of Darwin's birth and the publication of On The Origin Of The Species, to suddenly read stuff about the ancient prehistory of the planet in a book about the Napoleonic wars was certainly unprecedented and, frankly, rather wonderful.
I think Tolstoy would have applauded Talty's work, as it supports his view, as advanced in his masterwork, War & Peace, that so called 'Great Men' are in fact subject to forces both beyond their control and, as with Napoleon and Typhus, beyond their comprehension.
Whilst traditional military history buffs might quibble with occasional details regarding specific terms for details re uniforms, formations or technology, etc, I fervently hope most will see past such minutiae, and instead, as I did, find Talty's fluid and exciting narrative skills convincing. His descriptions of the actions at Smolensk and Borodino are amongst the clearest and most enjoyable (if, granted, not the most complete or detailed) I've read.
All in all, an excellent, enjoyable, quick and easy read, and a welcome plugging of a gap in our understanding of this much written about campaign, which succeeds in both finding a new and interesting angle of approach and retelling the familiar story in a vivid and compelling manner.
Excellent!
May 13, 2021
The headline of this book is "The terrifying story of how typhus killed Napoleon's greatest army." But the book was far more about the invasion of Russia and battles with the Russian army than the disease.
Most of the book was a blow-by-blow of the major battles, down to the details of which battalions were stationed where and how the battles unfolded over the course of the day. We learn a lot about the generals on each side and the conflicts between them that caused miscommunications, and of course, Napoleon's personality that caused him to attack for no real benefit. Then, every few pages the author reminds us that had typhus not ravaged Napoleon's army, the battles would have unfolded differently.
There was a bit of information about typhus, but nearly as much as I expected from a book that I thought was about typhus. This hardly compares to The Ghost Map by Steven Johnson about the cholera epidemic in London, or Justinian's Flea by William Rosen about how the plague shaped the Roman Empire.
However, I did come away learning a lot about Napoleon and the Battle of 1812 even if I didn't learn much about typhus. Overall, it was written by a journalist rather than a historian, so it flows well and is easy to read, not a dense history book filled with footnotes arguments with other historians.
Most of the book was a blow-by-blow of the major battles, down to the details of which battalions were stationed where and how the battles unfolded over the course of the day. We learn a lot about the generals on each side and the conflicts between them that caused miscommunications, and of course, Napoleon's personality that caused him to attack for no real benefit. Then, every few pages the author reminds us that had typhus not ravaged Napoleon's army, the battles would have unfolded differently.
There was a bit of information about typhus, but nearly as much as I expected from a book that I thought was about typhus. This hardly compares to The Ghost Map by Steven Johnson about the cholera epidemic in London, or Justinian's Flea by William Rosen about how the plague shaped the Roman Empire.
However, I did come away learning a lot about Napoleon and the Battle of 1812 even if I didn't learn much about typhus. Overall, it was written by a journalist rather than a historian, so it flows well and is easy to read, not a dense history book filled with footnotes arguments with other historians.
March 12, 2019
This is a fascinating story about the power of a pathogen to change the course of human history. Talty describes how the Napoleon lost his 1812 campaign to subjugate Russia largely because of the incredible toll typhus had on his troops. Simply fascinating.
I loved the disease and science aspects of the book. I will admit, however, that for me stepping through the intricate, often gory, ins and outs of every bloody battle grew a little tiring. Reality, yes, but tiring. Some may love this stuff; I would work through long discussions on war strategy and battlefield killing waiting with relish for the next section describing the science of disease. That science -- regarding what they did not know, what we do now, and often the discovery linking the two -- was what made this such a good read.
Oh, and actually it wasn't a "read". I listened to the book. I give the book itself a 4*, the reader perhaps a 3*. Clear reading, no problem there, just not a lot of inflection or heart that I at least love in a book-on-tape.
I loved the disease and science aspects of the book. I will admit, however, that for me stepping through the intricate, often gory, ins and outs of every bloody battle grew a little tiring. Reality, yes, but tiring. Some may love this stuff; I would work through long discussions on war strategy and battlefield killing waiting with relish for the next section describing the science of disease. That science -- regarding what they did not know, what we do now, and often the discovery linking the two -- was what made this such a good read.
Oh, and actually it wasn't a "read". I listened to the book. I give the book itself a 4*, the reader perhaps a 3*. Clear reading, no problem there, just not a lot of inflection or heart that I at least love in a book-on-tape.
June 17, 2019
The story of Napoleon’s disastrous 1812 invasion of Russia—perhaps the largest invading force since Xerxes with almost certainly the highest death toll until the Somme—was a suitably large topic for Stephan Talty’s fine pen; and wedding that account with the history of the louse-borne killer typhus was a masterstroke.
It’s certainly reasonable to conclude that disease killed off more of Napoleon’s Grande Armée than did the Russian winter, though how to parcel out causes of death for more than 400,000 of Napoleon’s troops will always remain guesswork. Autopsies were usually the last thing on anyone’s mind. For instance, Talty quotes an infantryman on the August march east to the effect that many men in his company had suddenly died of thirst. Talty adds, “It’s likely that typhus and dysentery were killing as many as, if not more than dehydration was.” (84) Talty is probably right; it’s just impossible to be sure.
This criticism is only a quibble. The book is a great double story, well told.
It’s certainly reasonable to conclude that disease killed off more of Napoleon’s Grande Armée than did the Russian winter, though how to parcel out causes of death for more than 400,000 of Napoleon’s troops will always remain guesswork. Autopsies were usually the last thing on anyone’s mind. For instance, Talty quotes an infantryman on the August march east to the effect that many men in his company had suddenly died of thirst. Talty adds, “It’s likely that typhus and dysentery were killing as many as, if not more than dehydration was.” (84) Talty is probably right; it’s just impossible to be sure.
This criticism is only a quibble. The book is a great double story, well told.
September 16, 2019
A fascinating military history of Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the role that Typhus and the common louse had in thwarting it. Napoleon stepped off into the Russia with approximately 650,000 men and the ravaged army came back 6 months later with less than 20,000. Nowhere near that number was lost on the battlefield. The significant battle, Borodino, was savagery (the most deaths on the field of battle until World War I) but that accounted for only about 40,000 deaths. Typhus was running rampant in the French army. Typhus, untreated, can cause almost 90% losses. The book traces Typhus history and effects, illuminating the half formed ideas that almost resulted in prevention, the failures that exasperated the losses in the French. It even shows how the Typhus could have changed history. A victorious Napoleon with 8 years (at least) as supreme ruler of Europe, a Russia were the Tsar was forced out in 1812, the serfs were freed very early, and we might not have had communism because the peasants had already been in charge for 60 plus years. All in all, a masterwork of history.
October 7, 2024
I found this to be an excellent and easy-to-read book that's writing is informative, yet simple. If this is your first time reading about Napoleon, as it was mine, then this book is perfect. It discusses Napoleon's assault on Russia in 1812. No battle in particular is picked apart too in detail, to avoid straying from the argument that the disease typhus played the largest role in destroying the Grand Armée. This being my first look at Napoleon, the text has certainly piqued my interests. His character, military prowess, and faults, all become clear and bring his fame to life for the reader. This book has a strong argument for the role of typhus in the French invasion of Russia, however, as many other reviews have mentioned, at times the author strays from the argument and mentions how severe weather, poor planning, starvation, etc., resulted in mass casualties, only for at the end of the chapter to mention disease that was likely typhus. Overall, it was a solid historical overview of France's defeat in 1812 that made me want to read further.
April 13, 2025
3.5 stars. The disaster of Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 is well known. The Russians made use of their vast territory, their scorched earth policy, along with the calamity of a relentless winter to outsmart Napoleon. He was sure they would have to surrender once he had taken Moscow. He was wrong. This was a holy war against an invader. Russia, under Alexander I, used all their resources to conquer the overconfident French Army. By the time they arrived in Moscow, the Grande Armee had aready been decimated by a small enemy--the louse which carried the typhus germ. Men fell like flies. Hospitals were overwhelmed. So many died that even Napoleon feared using his usual tactics in a great battle of annihilaton. Instead the Russians controlled the action until it was time for revenge.
This book describes what happened when a great army is felled by the small
louse. It's not a pretty story of great glory, even for the Russians who were rather lackadaisical in their pursuit of the enemy. As for the French, hubris and the louse sealed their doom.
This book describes what happened when a great army is felled by the small
louse. It's not a pretty story of great glory, even for the Russians who were rather lackadaisical in their pursuit of the enemy. As for the French, hubris and the louse sealed their doom.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 141 reviews