REVIEW OF NAPOLEON'S WARS BY CHARLES ESDAILE

John Tarttelin

Informations

• Publié par: Souladream
• Publié le: 28 janvier 2014
• Nombre de lectures: 91
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

REVIEW
OF
NAPOLEON’S
WARS
(2007)

By
Charles
Esdaile





Napoleon
at
Toulon
in
1793
by
Detaille
One of the most biased and one-sided books I have ever read in my
life.
This
diatribe
is
as
balanced
as
a
one‐legged
stool.
Esdaile
starts

with
the
arbitrary
date
of
1803
‐
as
if
France
and
Britain
had
not
been

fighting
each
other
for
decades.
It
was
French
support
for
American

Independence
from
an
imperial,
dominating
and
arrogant
British

government
that
helped
bankrupt
France
and
bring
on
the

Revolution
of
1789.
There
was
a
British
fleet
under
Admiral
Hood

actually
in
Toulon
harbour
in
1793
aiding
Royalist
rebels
‐

interfering
in
a
conflict
that
was
no
business
of
the
British.
And
it
was

a
young
Napoleon
who
responded
to
this
British
aggression
by
siting

his
cannon
so
that
the
Royal
Navy
had
no
option
but
to
evacuate
the

French
town.
One
wonders
what
the
corrupt
aristocratic
and

oligarchic
British
government
of
the
day
would
have
said
about

French
vessels
suddenly
appearing
at
Portsmouth
or
the
Pool
of

London
and
sticking
their
oar
into
British
internal
affairs?



Esdaile
quotes
copiously
from
the
likes
of
Fouché,
Talleyrand,

Bourrienne
and
Remusat
‐
all
hostile
witnesses,
despite
himself

saying
their
views
are
open
to
question.
General
John
Elting
in
his

masterly
book
Swords
Around
a
Throne
(1988)
refused
to
use

Bourrienne
and
Remusat
at
all
because
their
'memoirs'
are
so

notoriously
unreliable.
He
stated
that:
'In
preparing
this
book
I
have

used
original
sources
whenever
possible
but
have
ignored
the
alleged

memoirs
of
Louis
Bourrienne,
Paul
Barras,
Clare
de
Remusat,
Laure

Permon,
and
Miot
de
Melito,
which
are
mendacious
and
worthless'

(P.
735).
Indeed,
most
of
them
were
written
for
a
Bourbon
and

royalist
audience.



Fouché
and
Talleyrand
were
serial
traitors
who
betrayed
Napoleon

and
France
on
innumerable
occasions.
No
wonder
a
contemporary

called
them
'vice'
and
'crime'.
Bourrienne
was
caught
with
his
hand

in
the
till,
Napoleon
forgave
him
and
he
was
given
another
lucrative

post
until
he
repeated
his
crime.
Are
we
to
trust
the
words
of
a

criminal
against
the
man
who
forgave
him
and
gave
him
a
second

chance?



Esdaile
is
constantly
contradicting
himself
and
every
thing
he

mentions
is
given
a
hostile
spin.
He
even
endeavours
to
blame
Napoleon
for
the
worst
Russian
winter
in
100
years
in
1812.
Esdaile

obviously
knows
nothing
about
the
spate
of
volcanic
eruptions
that

affected
the
weather
of
the
period.
The
decade
1810‐1820
was
the

coldest
decade
of
the
C19th
due
to
those
eruptions
filling
the

atmosphere
with
dust
‐
leading
to
widespread
climate
change
‐
an
El

Nino
event
which
affected
world
temperatures,
and
a
low
sunspot

count
which
is
also
indicative
of
low
temperatures.



According
to
Esdaile,
Napoleon
repeatedly
'forced'
other
countries
to

attack
him.
Everything
was
his
fault
and
his
fault
alone.
Esdaile's

Napoleon
is
like
a
James
Bond
villain
who
gets
up
every
morning

with
the
thought
of
dominating
the
world
before
he
has
had
his

breakfast.
It
would
be
amusing
if
it
wasn't
so
pathetic.
And
of
course,

he
quotes
British
politicians
who
decry
Napoleon
for
wanting
world

domination,
when
the
British
Navy
was
dominating
the
seas
and

forcing
every
other
nation
to
bow
to
their
will.
And
as
for
England

being
the
'land
of
the
free’,
yes
it
did
abolish
slavery
in
1807
but
this

did
not
stop
it
impressing
seamen
from
other
nations
and
refusing

thereafter
to
ever
give
them
shore
leave
in
case
they
'deserted'
.
This

insufferable
arrogance
led
to
America
declaring
war
on
Britain
in

1812.
No
doubt,
that
was
all
Napoleon's
fault
too?



This
isn't
history
‐
it's
propaganda!





©
2014
John
Tarttelin



M.A.
(History)
F.I.N.S
(Legion
of
Merit)