Having started a bio on Napoleon by another author and finding it too hard to digest I decided to try John Abbott's history on the legendary Frenchman. With me reading Napoleon's early days in the bio that I abandoned I skipped the first couple of chapters and took the story up from events in 1796.

Abbott is a good writer but I found this tome too repetitive and over detailed. Abbott has the utmost respect for Napoleon, so I understand his enthusiasm, but I feel he would've created a better account of the famous emperor's life if he'd refined it more. This is the first of four volumes and having read the first two I already think a three volume set would've been a better idea. The further I progressed into the text, the more often I started skipping over paragraphs.

My reasons for stating the above is mainly due to the amount of times Abbott stresses that Napoleon was a good man; that he was merciful; that he didn't want war, plus various other commendable things. As a reader I don't need to be constantly told the same things.

Abbott sometimes recalls events from a certain battle and then repeats it all again in brief from a different perspective. Every so often he wants to remind us of what Napoleon had achieved by such and such a time, thus he spends a page or so going over what he's already explained. I skipped these parts. This is another reason why I feel a three-volume set would've been more appropriate.

It's good to read quotes by Napoleon but Abbott tends to use many that convey the same message, like Napoleon not wanting war, or justifying his actions by stating the same reasons over and over.

Anyone - like John Abbott - who is obsessed or fascinated by Napoleon will most likely get much more enjoyment from this work than I have. That said, I'm glad to learn more about Napoleon, as I've always thought of him as a mad dictator. I now know that he was a man devoted not only to his country, but he wanted to help the people - that is the average citizen, not the rich - of the rest of the world.

He was one of these great men who were misunderstood by the leaders of other nations. Those who were opposed to him - mainly monarchs who feared he'd dethrone them and give power to the people - blackened his reputation by printing falsehoods about him. It's a shame that these people couldn't gather what good Napoleon was trying to do. ( )