Read hb napoleon deluxe reviews, rating & opinions:Check all hb napoleon deluxe reviews below or publish your opinion.
100 Reviews Found
The utility for taking pictures of check deposits regularly CANNOT take a picture. seems to work for the front picture sometimes. I can never take the second, back picture. Fix it please. my BECU check deposit application works fine. it's your application not my phone.
This application has most of the major options that the bigger banks have in their apps, including the mobile check deposit option and bill pay. The bill makes it so simple to send a check out for monthly expenses to beautiful much any company or any person. This created my transition from the dreaded Bank of America so much easier. Love it!
Recently it has been difficult to deposit checks. Repeatedly timing out and logging out while trying to take pic of check. It finally worked today. Also I tried to search a method to track my mobile deposits to ensure they were accepted. I only found out how because a customer service rep told me in the phone. Still will use though hopefully
I moved out of state and have come to rely on mobile check deposits and I have not had any problems until recently when it kicks me out and says "session timed out due to inactivity" but i was only entering check info. Had to test a few times and go really quick because the application created me begin over. I uninstalled, closed apps, restarted phone and reinstalled application and it didnt do it again after that. Besides that, its great! Helps to use the flash and have the check placed on a dark background so the pics come out excellent. Im also glad I am able to remove payees from the list. I wasn't able to for a long time and I dont have a computer. It used to only allow me enter fresh payees so I had to go on every month to cancel payment for the longest time. Thank you for the convenience of a amazing application with a amazing bank :)
In 1841, Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle penned On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and The Heroic in History. One of the first histories to bring forth the "Great Man" tradition of history--the view that certain individuals are driving forces of history, and simply knowing about such individuals would give one a amazing command of the history of that era, Andrew Roberts, an English historian, joined this little but notable rank of Anglosphere historians to laud Napoleon as such a figure. What makes this work even more incredible, all things considered, is that an English historian would write and publish a biography of Napoleon that is certainly apologetic and positive on the eve of the bicentennial of the over mythologized War of Waterloo where British Nationalists have long wanted to assert that this event, rather than the not good campaigns of 1813-1814 where Britain played a minimal role, as the Gotterdammerung of Napoleon's life and erefore, the biography written by Andrew Roberts stands drastically apart from the majority of scholarship in the latest 40 years of Anglosphere scholarship that has undeniable attempted, with vigor, sometimes very eruditely, and at other times poorly--to destroy the "great man" historiographical tradition and with it, any attempt to view Napoleon as "Great" in the same tradition of the other "Great" leaders in globe history. From Charles Esdaile (2008) who attempted to destroy the credibility of the Amazing Man historiographical tradition, to Philip Dwyer (2008 and 2011) whose two-volume work on Napoleon attempted to cast him as a myth-maker and brutal battlefield butcher, to Alan Schom (1997) whose biographical work was described as a "hatchet job" on the French emperor, to Owen Connelly (1987) whose work Blundering to Glory: Napoleon's Military Campaigns cast Napoleon as an otherwise incompetent battle-planner whose true genius was his ability to improvise in the heat of war that won him fame and glory on the battlefield, the list goes on of Anglo-American historians who apparently have an axe to grind with Napoleon. While Connelly's work is, perhaps, somewhat pro-Napoleon in an awkward way, the majority of Anglosphere scholarship has constantly attempted to tear down Napoleon's status--but Andrew Roberts eruditely attempts to dispel and overturn these constant attacks versus one of the modern period's latest amazing rulers and generals. Rather than cast Napoleon as an "Anti-Christ," butcher on the battlefield, or a bloodthirsty ego-maniac, Roberts casts Napoleon in the same vein that Napoleon saw himself as, one of the amazing individuals of history: a general, husband, emperor, and lawgiver.Upon the eve of the twin wars of Jena and Auerstedt, in which Napoleon's forces would utterly devastate the Prussian armies and lead to the emperor's swift capture of Berlin, forcing a Russian intervention, the German philosopher George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel wrote of his encounter with "The Globe Soul" (speaking of Napoleon) whom sent shockwaves through Hegel's body. As the tradition story goes, Hegel even altered aspects of his amazing work Phenomenology of Spirit (one of the most necessary works of modern Western philosophy) after this encounter with the Frenchman who could only ever be admired by his onlookers (pp. 415-418). Napoleon, likewise, as Roberts' shows throughout his work, thought of himself as a amazing "World Soul" pushing the progress of humanity forward. Rather than an usurper and tyrant, as Anglo-American scholars have often depicted Napoleon for us, Napoleon himself saw himself as the embodiment of French Enlightenment philosophy. Any student of the French political philosophers would naturally agree, the Enlightenment philosophes were extremely elitist and saw institutional absolutism as the only avenue for the progress of humanity since the normal peasant was a brutish animal by their very nature. In this same tradition, Napoleon truly did see himself as the pinnacle of the Enlightened absolutist political tradition, and paradoxically for many, saw himself as the protector of the French republican tradition despite becoming an emperor. Contrary to Anglo-American scholarship, Napoleon isn't a pseudo-republican despot, but the very epitome of Enlightenment republicanism, or better, Enlightened Absolutism. After all, this is why Andrew Roberts says of Napoleon, "[He] was the Enlightenment on horseback."Roberts', while certainly presenting a positive case for Napoleon, is not short of his criticism of the French emperor. Roberts highlights some of the battlefield brutality that Napoleon was capable of committing. He has no apologetic defense for Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the fallout that ensued, Roberts equally makes clear that a lot of Europeans, but especially Frenchmen, died in Napoleon's gambit to wrangle Europe under his t, at the same time, Roberts doesn't shorthand Napoleon's battlefield brilliance, his ability to inspire mates and foes alike, but more importantly, does not attempt to destroy Napoleon's Legal reforms: the Napoleonic Code. Napoleon, as a Law Giver, is perhaps the most successful legislator or administrator of any figure in Europe in the latest 200 years. Napoleon's institutions that embodied meritocracy, religious tolerance and pluralism, and a legal structure that certainly curbed the influence of favoritism in politics due to one's noble birth rank have remained, at least structurally, the mainframe of modern European law ever since Napoleon's ride across Europe. His armies may have failed to defeat Europe, but his legislation, in bitter irony, conquered his conquerors. Roberts' chapter on the Napoleonic Code is where his work shines most brightly, even if it is a short chapter--for Napoleon himself saw his civil code as his greatest accomplishment nearing his deathbed (p. 270).Upon reading Roberts' book, while it seems impossible that a figure as towering as Napoleon can ever have "the definitive one-volume biography," Andrew Roberts comes as close as it can get. One is left only to awe at Napoleon's meteoric rise to power, his battlefield ability, his own egoism, his political ability as lawgiver and administrator (which is where Napoleon has been most successful, now, almost 200 years after his death, his legal reforms still have more widespread influence than his armies ever died), and at the same time, one can see the propaganda machine and battlefield brutality hard at work. Roberts has written a biography of Napoleon not casting him as "Great" in the sense that Americans view the deified trio of Presidents: Washington, Lincoln, or FDR, but "great" in the historiographical sense--no other figure from 1796-1815 held the globe in his hand, and moved almost 20 years of European history with a single breath, or had the rest of a continent trembling in their boots and reacting to his every move.
Unbelievable first hand acc of Napoleon's Russian campaign of 1812 by the master of the Horse who traveled with Napoleon. M Caulaincourt's recollections of his conversations with Napoleon are absolutely fascinating and reveal a amazing of insight into the hero of the man. How Napoleon thinks! is is also an acc of how the Russians under Tsar Alexander I played "rope a dope" with the most strong man in the globe and used Napoleon's own hero and successful tactics versus him to destroy Le Grand Armee. Very well written. I never had much interest in the Napoleonic Period, but now I am going to read everything I can obtain my hands on about the Napoleonic Period, the man and his wars. What a bang for my 99 cents!
This is not only the first one-volume history of Napoleon but also THE book on Napoleon to read if you are fresh to his life-history or looking for a new take. Thanks to the latest release of his personal letters (33,000+) and a fellowship at the Napoleonic Institute, Roberts has a far wider and deeper look into this infamous leader than any other author has had before. I sometimes search one-volume efforts unwieldy, but Roberts has been providing this style of high-quality history reading ever since "The Storm of War" and "Masters and Commanders", and this book simply follows suit! To say it simply, he knows the material and shares it well. I wouldn't call myself an expert of western history, really an amateur aficionado at best, even though I've read a lot about globe politics of the time including biographies of the personalities and memoirs by the participants. This book sets a amazing foundation for Kissinger's "A Globe Restored", which picks up after the fall of r far too long, Napoleon has been subjected to over-sized myths and slanderous libel. Roberts' thesis is that Napoleon was not at all some kind of proto-Hitler dictator but rather the latest and greatest leader of the Enlightenment who had a lot of admirable qualities. A surprisingly sympathetic view from a Brit! Of course he had an ugly side (responsibility for battles that killed 4-6 million isn't easily forgotten or forgiven) but I was impressed to learn of his involvement in the regeneration of post-Revolution France, patronage to the arts, and establishment of equality under the Napoleon om his upbringing in the obscure (yet lovely) city of Ajaccio, Corsica, only recently purchased by Louis XV from the Genoese, Napoleon never lost the sense that he was not-exactly-French. Napoleon led his life with remarkable and discipline and his dream to lead benefited France almost by accident. Politically, his impact on his country and Europe was clearly profound, but militarily he was out of this world! Roberts' captures his revolutionary touch of warfare, military supplies, logistics, and the use of artillery and tactics, especially in such wars as Austerlitz in 1805 and Friedland in e one zone that I found flaw in the book was in Roberts' retelling of Napoleon's strategic failings. One of his key arguments that the catastrophic invasion of Russia in 1812 was beyond his control, really overlooks what Napoleon overlooked - which is that he underestimated not just the skill of their generals (ie. Barclay de Tolly) and fighting quality of their troops, but also the determination of the tsar. And although Roberts concedes that "Napoleon's understanding of naval affairs was dismal," his brief mention of losing Trafalgar in 1805 really understates the issue. The War of Trafalgar was pivotal in determining globe trade systems and killed French hopes of invading England while boosting British economy so that even by 1815 France had barely reached Britain's level of industrialism in short, I recommend this book whole-heartedly as a one-volume history of Napoleon which reassesses his rule from a distance of time. Hopefully you don't mind that I came to this opinion by reading a review copy of the book and instead found this review helpful!
The first 3/4s of the book are interesting and provide a decent insight into France's ruinous Russia Campaign of 1812. I say decent because the author does not always have the access and placement important to accurately describe the a lot of wars in this campaign. The narrator is either intentionally boxed out of Napoleons inner circle or never was afforded the access in the first place. In a lot of parts of the book I felt like we were watching the shadows on the wall from a play we could not hear, much like Plato's "Republic". The latest 1/4 of the book is a a composite of conversations the narrator had with Napoleon on his departure from the battlefield. The only thing interesting are the snippets of interactions with postal and horse masters in Poland, Prussia, Saxony, and then finally France. In those final 100 pages, Napoleon ruminates over those he perceives to have slighted or caused him to lose all the while trying to convince everyone he is a kind and enlightened ruler, unlike the Tsar in Russia or Kings in is is an abridged version, and it could definitely have benefited from better maps and explanations of the major characters. I had to revert to wikipedia several times to obtain a better understanding of where the campaign was in zone and time, and more importantly, who the major characters and countries were. There is a glossary at the end of the book, but its dated and doesn't explain that the Napoleon had established the Duchy of Warsaw was a Polish vassal state or that the Kingdom of Naples was the southern half of what is now Italy. The only map of any value is at the very end of the book and is not well illustrated.I am an troops officer and have been to a lot of of the locations in the book, in the winter, and can tell you Armand de Caulaincourt does a not good job of describing how cold that region is in the winter and how rough and unforgiving the terrain can be.
Covers his topic well.But some of his interpretations do smack of pre-conceived bias. For instance he does not give the background to rhe 'massacre at Jaffa'. Napoleon had earlier freed Turkish prisoners of war, but after a later war discovered his fresh prisoners of battle included men he had freed earlier, who had vowed not to take up arms again. With no additional rations, this time around the circumstances of battle left him with no choice but to place this fresh batch of POWs to the sword. Otherwise he would hold swelling the ranks of his e author also liberally quotes the discredited Bourrienne. Making you wonder about his other is quite strange how some historians hold painting Napoleon as a battle monger while excusing the 'Allies who raised seven coalitions versus France after the revolution. Napoleon was not even in power when the first two were launched. It is beautiful clear that Napoleon or not, these 'Allies would not have rested until a Bourbon was placed back on the French throne. Napoleon's 'crime' was continually defeating these coalitions in battle, until eventually overcome by British and Russian, Prussian and Austrian is also ironic that Napoleon is continually referred to as a 'dictator, as if his opponents were modern liberal democracies. There is no question that the French under Napoleon enjoyed greater rights than any other country of the time except arguably Britain. Who can doubt that Russians - especially serfs - would have been far better off had they been conquered by the French and granted the Code Napoleon?His opponents were all hereditary monarchs who ruled by decree. Which other ruler of the time - Britain again accepted - gave the public a possibility to vote for or versus him? As for the dismissal by some historians of Napoleon's 'loaded plebiscites', well surely his acclamation by the people on the return from Elba was concrete proof of his genuine popularity among the French masses?Perhaps there can be no greater calumny versus Napoleon than to compare him to Hitler. Hitler the architect of the holocaust was the butcher of the Jews. Napoleon was greatest liberator of the Jews in European history, freeing them from the ghettos wherever he went. This was one of the main reasons why his opponents like Russian Czar dubbed him 'the anti-christ'. When he fell, the laws freeing the Jews were reversed.Historical what ifs can only speculative. But had Napoleon succeeded in creating a Europe governed by the Code Napoleon, the odds of a Stalin and Hitler coming to power would surely have been greatly poleon was in Lord Acton's words 'the ablest of historic men'. And yet in the end, perhaps it was for the better that even such a humane and tolerant genius did not attain the control he would have wished for? As Lord Acton also wrote, power corrupts even the best of men.
Very well researched in presenting a complex figure in history. The author did a amazing job in providing fresh insights into the life of Napoleon and cleared some misconceptions about him. This is an in depth novel that gives the reader a amazing perspective into one of the sometimes controversial but well respected military leaders of all time. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book and would recommend it to anyone interested in learning about Napoleon and his impact on globe history.
My library includes some 250 books on the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic eras. I thought I’d read virtually everything worth knowing, but I devoured this sympathetic and yet eyes-wide-open biography. In just 800 pages, Roberts weaves the Corsican’s private and public lives into a coherent whole, no little achievement considering the topic was a giant who towered over a continent for two decades. Roberts’ Napoleon is new from the get-go, as he presents the boy as voracious reader, soaking up the adventures of Alexander and Caesar. Drawing on Napoleon’s newly published complete letters (tens of thousands of them), Roberts describes an indefatigable ruler who out-Caesared Julius. Even in the midst of his most difficult military campaigns, the imperial Napoleon bombarded his bureaucrats back home with mountains of correspondence on subjects ranging from French theatrical productions to the untimely death in a traffic accident of a little boy he never knew. Napoleon the passionate lover, cuckolded spouse, and collector of mistresses also gets his due in Roberts’s book. The author’s admiration for Napoleon as military commander, enduring lawgiver, and effective administrator comes through, but he never fails to identify the blind spots and cascading mistakes that turned Europe’s foremost realist into the tragic captive of St. Helena. The book is by turns encyclopedic and novelistic. “Napoleon” is filled with riveting passages, such as the impact of typhus on the Russian campaign or the Emperor’s dramatic return from Elba to reclaim his throne. Few lives compare with Napoleon’s for adventure, tragedy and legacy: perhaps only those of Alexander, Caesar, Joan of Arc, and Lincoln. No single-volume biography of Napoleon I’ve seen compares with this one for insight and completeness.
Strangely, less is more in this extraordinary biography of Napoleon. David Bell takes only small more than 100 pages to tell the remarkable story of the latest amazing emperor of Europe. It takes full control of the facts about the rise and fall of Napoleon, facts that draw on his military genius, the chaotic state of European politics in the early-19th century, and a supine French government more than willing to crown a small known boy from Corsica as its “Emperor”. Along the way, Napoleon virtually redrew the map of Paris, changed the structure of its government, fused rural and suburban France into a functioning European power, and came close to ruling all of Professor Bell says in the opening lines of his book, bookshelves are groaning under the weight of biographies of Napoleon. His contribution is to describe only the most pivotal moments of Napoleon’s life, relate them to the context of European history at the time, and move his story rapidly to its sad conclusion – sad for Napoleon, who stood at the top of Europe’s power structure and ended all but forgotten on a remote island in the middle of the South Atlantic ocean. This is a familiar story but Professor Bell makes it understandable by fitting it effortlessly into the broader history of Europe in the early 19th cannot come away from this short book in awe of what a talented individual Napoleon was. He was a superb and inspiring leader, a genius at picking his wars and then executing them almost without any major errors, a amazing leader of a complicated nation recovering from a bloody revolution that ended in the decapitation of a king and l this is packed into just over 100 pages. It is a amazing small work of history.
It is exactly as it claims to be: a concise biography of Napoleon. And a very amazing one it is. It is an engaging read for both a first time reader and a Napoleonic "veteran". Not just a list of battles, it ties together both wars and international politics with his family and dynastic ambitions. The life-career of The Emperor is given plausible connections. Bravo!
Even allowing for Caulaincourt's quite understandable biases, his closeness to Napoleon in conditions of extreme hardship and failure makes this an extraordinary assumes that the Wehmacht's General Staff had access to at least some of the facts described here before launching Operation Barbarossa. It is a pity that Hitler did not read the book, because the parallels are uncanny.
How a lot of figures in globe history have been the topic of as a lot of biographies as Napoleon Bonaparte? Probably Jesus, maybe Caesar and Lincoln, Churchill coming up fast, possibly George Washington. But this one-volume history of Napoleon (always referred to by his given name, not his surname) is an absolutely first-rate work in its scope – running to more than 800 pages – and the magnitude of the drama playing out page after page. Andrew Roberts, one of the most distinguished British historians gives it all. We read about Napoleon’s almost unbelievably rapid surge from a remote village in Corsica to military school in France and, at only age 27, the leadership of the France troops in its invasion and conquest of Italy. This was quickly followed by a smashing win in Egypt where its magnificent were shipped back to France, where a lot of of them continue to be on display today, mainly in only 30 years of age, Napoleon seized power in a revolt versus the fragile government made by the French Revolution. He became the First Consul of France, initially joined by two other consuls. The Bourbon reign had been ended, tragically for the reigning monarch, Louis XIV, and the country’s government was in the hands of ardent revolutionaries, who were far better at scheming than governing. Napoleon rapidly shouldered all competitors aside and turned his energies to sorting out the mess of Europe. The Austrian state was in its final throes of decay but it still had enormous assets, both military and financial. Britain was separated from Europe by water, lots of water, and exercised its power only when one or another European state became clearly ascendant. Russia was a distant presence on the borders of Eastern Europe but had a large population and powerful ties to the royal houses of central Europe. This was clearly an unstable situation, with each major state anxious to extend its influence, almost always at the expense of one or another of the major poleon understood that military victories gave him enormous civil power. Austria remained a powerful power in northeastern Italy and Napoleon moved to engage the Austrian army, first by drawing the Austrian troops further away from its supply lines in Central Europe. At Marengo, he soundly defeated the Austrian troops and returned to France in poleon’s career moved from one brilliant military success after another and in 1804 he was crowned Emperor. This enabled him to lead both the troops and the government. He redrew the map of Paris, he reformed the French educational system, he encouraged the arts, he commissioned a lot of of the most remarkable buildings still glittering in Paris, he consolidated the power of France, never more complete than in the early years of his the peak of his power, Napoleon moved much further east across the European continent to invade Russia. He had defeated the Russian troops earlier, in 1807, but this was in the heart of central Europe. Russia’s power centers, Moscow and Petersburg, were hundreds of miles to east and Napoleon elected to knock out not only the Russian troops but its government, headed by Tsar Alexander, with whom Napoleon had established powerful bonds of friendship earlier. This effort to subdue Russia, with its large population, hideous winters, vast expanse, and strong allies – mainly Britain – was a disaster for Napoleon. It marked the beginning of his decline, not precipitous at first but 1814, France had tired of Napoleon and, without significant emotion, dismissed him, sending him to Elba, a little island in the Mediterranean. His confinement there lasted less than a year and by February 1815 he arrived back on the southern shores of France. Initially with only a fragmentary force, he picked up help steadily as he moved north and arrived about a month later in Paris. The bloated Louis XVIII fled Paris and Napoleon reassumed his role as Emperor, 18 days after arriving on French soil and without any military e end was near. In late-March, a lot of of the major European powers joined together to form a Coalition versus Napoleon. In mid-June, Napoleon moved his units north into Belgium where a large force under the Duke of Wellington waited for the French army. Napoleon’s superb military instincts enabled him to vanquish troops after troops for more than ten years but these instincts failed him at Waterloo. He was destroyed by the British-Prussian-Dutch-Belgian force. Napoleon resigned and in mid-July 1815 he was sent to a distant island in the mid-Atlantic, St Helena, 4400 miles from the shores of France. Here, he lived until his agonizing death almost six years is is a amazing story told by Andrew Roberts. It presents a balanced view of a very amazing man, a man who created a amazing difference to France and French values. He was the master of Europe for almost a decade, starting as a raw prodigy and ending as one of the greatest military minds of globe history. He was, however, far beyond only a military genius. Napoleon reshaped France and Paris into one of the first modern states in Europe and his legend continues to glow. One can only, in the end, admire Napoleon for all his bonuses and we have Mr. Roberts to thank for shining his light on this amazing story.
Even though I'm not all that interested in the info of numerous wars in any book, because for one thing, it's hard for me to visualize people coming in from left and right flanks and various angles, and to grasp the multiple armies with various allegiances, which at times was confusing given that I couldn't read the Kindle maps, this was all a part of Napoleon's life -- and I was entranced by how willing so a lot of people were to give their lives in the name of glory and for Napoleon -- Robert really got at the essence of a monumentally influential historical figure and the forward movement of his life. The book went to the heart of a question that fascinates me -- i.e. how does a person like Napoleon become what they end up being? Roberts addresses the strengths and weaknesses of Napoleon's character, his first meteoric rise to power, and then his temporary rise again -- this guy never gave up! -- and his final days, when only a few people were interested in being a part of his life. Totally fascinating, very engaging! I highly recommend this.
If I could award this book seven stars I would do so in a minute. It may well be the best biography ever written of Napoleon. Using the more than 33,000 letters that Napoleon wrote which, for the most part have not been used by previous biographers, Roberts gives the most complete picture of the man I have ever encountered. We learn about Napoleon's dressing, eating and sleeping e reader will also learn that Napoleon was a micro manager, very well read and had enormous energy. We learn also that he was a not good lover rarely satisfying his 22 mistresses as well the a lot of issues he had with his troublesome family. The measure of the man is captured in this quote: "In less than fifteen weeks Napoleon had effectively ended the French Revolution...given France a fresh constitution,[and] established her finances on a sound footing...." The book includes unbelievable maps and the color prints of the people around him are marvelous. . I had never heard of Berthier, Napoleon's chief of staff nor of Cambaceres, his civilian second in command before I read this book. Napoleon was a amazing general but has Roberts shows his star began to dim as he faced more competent enemies and created the horrendous mistakes of invading Russia and getting involved in the Iberian peninsula. Napoleon effectively lost three amazing battles, Borodino, Leipzig, which he should not have fought and, of course, Waterloo which he should of won. He also should have been content with exile on Elba but it would not have been Napoleon had he not tried a comeback and landed himself on St. Helena.,
This is an outstanding read. The author is articulate and shows amazing insight into the Emperor’s character. Napoleon had a large ego and dismissed the author’s tip on the perils of Russia. The destruction of the French Troops is a disaster. Hitler’s ultimate destruction began with his attack on the Soviet Union in WWII.
The book avoided superfluous and convoluted language so that it was simple to read. The straight forward nature of the writing allowed for a clear understanding of Napolean. The author was very knowledgable which allowed him to provide an encompassing history of Napoleon Bonepart.
This is a splendid biography and while one hesitates to anoint any single volume of such a singular figure as definitive, Mr. Roberts has produced the best book on Napoleon in English. His fluid prose keeps the tale flowing swiftly over a hefty 810 pages, a literary feat in and of is is not the definitive military history of Napoleon. There are racks of them, and for the most trenchant analysis of military genius, David Chandler's volume retains its supremacy. What Roberts achieves that others have not, is to paint a fuller picture of the Corsican polymath. He info Napoleon's relations with women, his love of intellectual achievement, art, archaeology, architecture, science, math, myth, poetry, and plays. Roberts delves into the of bonds, as indication of the financial community's faith or doubt about the stability of the regime. We are presented intimate portraits of his relations with his a lot of difficult relations, including Mademe-Mere, the sphinx-like Bonaparte matriarch. Napoleon's friendships and betrayals are presented, as is his tempestuous relationship with Josephine. Napoleon becomes more human through this multi-layered berts is especially skilled at dissecting "first-hand" accounts by contemporaries, sifting through self-serving memoirs while comparing those to letters and journals written closer to the actual events. His demonstrates unusual facility as well as command of multiple sources, in discounting one source to the favor of another, and parsing the disparate agendas of the a lot of witnesses of this titanic ither hagiography nor screed, "Napoleon: A Life" suffers slightly from the biographer's curse - Roberts is a small too forgiving of his topics faults, too ready to accept Napoleon's justifications for his actions. While cataloging the a lot of forced "contributions" and confiscations of art and treasure, Roberts fails to call out the essential kleptocracy of the Bonapartist regime. Napoleon may have railed versus the "shopkeepers" of England, but unable to generate wealth, as the English did, he simply stole it. This tactic had its limits, however. In the end, his avarice depleted both France and Europe. His regime was not sustainable. Peace was not its predicate; battle was its requirement. The mothers of France correctly perceived that his regime offered endless war, for which their sons - at younger and younger ages - were sacrificed. Small wonder they turned versus ere are quibbles with this book - the maps are not as instructive or as plentiful as needed and should be enhanced in later editions. But these are nits. Mr. Roberts has produced a superb study, an elegant biography.
Review of Andrew Roberts, Napoleon: A Life (New York: Viking, 2014). A magisterial work, overarching in its scope and yet grounded in min detail having the benefit of more of Napoleon’s own letters than any previous biographer. Calls him “the founder of modern France and one of the amazing conquers of history” and points out that more enemies declared battle on him than he on them and points out that he fought 60 wars and lost only 7 (Acre, Aspern-Essling, Leipzig, La Rothiere, Laon, Arcis and Waterloo. The Duke of Wellington would say when asked who was the greatest captain of the age would answer ‘In this age, in past ages, in any age, Napoleon.” (xxxv). Roberts remains surprised that the French lost Waterloo with inexplicably poor wars by most of the French commanders, including Napoleon who “Very much deserved to lose it.” He does not believe that Napoleon had to lose the Russian campaign but at 1800 miles from Paris, Borodino was the biggest war in the history of Europe since Roman times and would remain the biggest until the first war of the Marne in 1914. Lauds Napoleon’s blending of speed, maneuver, convergence, a genius for topography and an acute sense of timing but points out that he never understood naval warfare, instituted the disastrous Continental System and only he could create the unforced errors which would pull him down from the pinnacle of his empire in 1810, the biggest since Rome and larger than Charlemagne’s. A magnificent work from begin to finish.