"Dr. Chandlers 'Campaigns of Napoleon'" Topic

Dr. Chandlers best book in my opinion. It is absolutely amazing! I have never read a book with so much gusto in my life! What do you guys think of it?

if i could only type..having read it twice so far it is certainly a favorite

yeah, it is a must for any bookshelf, great historian and is sadly missed.

First book I read volenteraly as an adult,

hadn't read a non school book before, started on this book and it got me intrested in reading

a great book by a great chap!

I was in the Army and needed a little peace and quiet, so I went to the base library and plopped-down into the first available easy chair. Turning my head to the shelf beside the chair, there was the book. It was love at first sight. That was 30 plus years ago, but the book and I are still a happy couple. Excellent read even if you aren't overly interested in the period.
Bob

I first read it in high school 41 years ago; it's still my favorite single survey of Napoleonic warfare. I've given copies to 3 of the kids to get them introduced to the period, and had my copy disappear in my father's hands for extended periods.

I can think multiple occasions over the years that I've sat down to read War and Peace, got to chapter 2, thought I could be reading the nonfiction account instead, and re-read Chandler yet another time.

Rick

Read it with Elting's mapbook of the Napoleonic Wars beside you (name escapes me at the moment). The two together are a treat, great textual detail by Chandler and awesome cartographic detail from Elting. Hard thing to do in bed though!! Yes, yes, there are errors, but all-in-all, one can't go wrong having these sources.

It was my first Napoleonics book and I have been hooked on Napoleonics ever since. I once got hold of a second one and when I found a friend who enjoyed military history, I passed it along.

Sounds like you guys like it as much as I do.

ghost

Well, it is certainly Chandler's most famous book and it may be his best, but personally I do not rate it. Chandler only used British and French sources and consequently his text is heavily biased towards the French except when he is describing campaigns against the British. One example is his use of casualty figures, in effect he uses Napoleon's own estimates rather than the other side's records. As Boney inflated these for propoganda purposes back home it is hopelessly misleading.

It is very much a creature of its time (the seventies) and thankfully Napoleonic historiography has progressed significantly, and in many ways this is the book's greatest achievement. In another light it has also helped propagate preconceived ideas that have taken a very long while to chip away at. I read it twenty years ago and it made me very uncomfortable, and I tried to read it again recently and just ended up getting annoyed with it. I am not sure it has any real credibility as a historical work any more.

K

Could you recommend another book then? I am interested in the Campaign of Ulm and Austerlitz.

How Far from Austerlitz by Alistair Horne?

I remain a fan of Chandler however and am grateful for his analysis of Napoleons Russian Campaign which got me an A+ in one essay at University many moons ago.

A brilliant over-view of the subject. Almost as good as Fletcher Pratt's one-volume history of the ACW.

there will always be critics but overall Chandler's book is probably the best single souce book you will find atm.

However, Kagan's book. Napoleon and Europe 1801-1805 The End of the Old Order (the fist volume) is a brilliant read and probably will superceed it as a single source even if it is in three volumes. He does outstanding work.

Regards,
Shane

Conur with all of the above. Been on my bookshelf for years; read umpteen times.

For Austerliz try 1805 Austerlitz by Robert Goetz, probably the best book on the campaign that is still in print.
William

Try Krieg 1805 if you read German.

K

I prefer the Esposito/Elting A Military History and Atlas of the Napoleonic Wars to Chandler's Campaigns of Napoleon. I read the Atlas first, then Campaigns, and have always believed that Campaigns was nothing but a lesser encore to the Atlas (the Atlas was published in 1964, Campaigns in 1966).

The Atlas if very straight forward and was done as a text book. It to my mind captures the period much better than Campaigns and doesn't attempt to systemize Napoleon's methods of waging war as campaigns does. Further, Campaigns uses some dubious sources, such as Bourrienne, Liddel Hart, JFC Fuller, Fouche, Jomini, Macdonald, Marmont, Remusat, de Segur, and Thiers, which the Atlas does not.

I believe that Chandler's best work is his book on the Age of Marlborough and On the Napoleonic Wars.

Anyone starting on the Napoleonic period could do much worse than starting with the Atlas. It is accurate (any mistakes, and they were few and far between were corrected in the 1999 update), easy to read, and is an excellent reference. The military history instructors, though not the cadets, still use it at West Point.

Sincerely,
Kevin

Oh, NOOOOO, not the ‘uses unreliable sources' bug-a-boo again! What was it Herr Dr. Goebbels said about ‘the whooper' and repeating it?

Why aren't those that use Marbot condemned to the same horrible fate? That special ‘hell hole' set aside for those that use ‘unreliable sources'.

Give us a break. Please, no more ‘uses unreliable sources' bug-a-boo.

Just one man's opinion, mind you. <;^}

Bricole, any one?

Kiley, that book is $200 USD on amazon. I'd rather have a few 'unreliable sources'! lol.

Keyser, I'll take a look at that book, sounds good.

Shane, I will take a look at the book also. Thank you all for the recommendations!

hi ghost,

no worries, this is the link :

link

Thank you for the link. It looks pretty good.

@ Steven H Smith

Oh I agree, Marbot and his 'Ripping Yarns' are great fun as Boy's Own material but hardle to be taken seriously…

K

Ghost,

You can get it for about $65.00 USD on abebooks.com. That is the 1965 or 1980 edition, but still excellent.

Sincerely,
Kevin

K,

You do have to be careful with Marbot, but not all of it is a problem. For example, his telling of the fighting around Borisov in 1812 is accurate. You just have to be careful with it.

Sincerely,
Kevin

"I prefer the Esposito/Elting A Military History and Atlas of the Napoleonic Wars to Chandler's Campaigns of Napoleon"

Kevin, this book has great maps, but it lacks in the detail one needs to better understand the battles. See my recommendation to read this book beside Chandler's. An awesome pair and what every amateur wants: detailed text and detailed maps. Too bad the two together weight about 50 lbs!! (~22 kg's for us metric people).

"Try Krieg 1805 if you read German."

Most of us can't read German, so we "unworthies" will just have to stick to "flawed" texts.

Wouldn't "1805" imply that it only covers a certain period? Certainly not the breadth of topic that "Campaigns" covers.

Rob

Well, he said he was interested in the 1805 period. Krieg 1805 and Krieg 1809 have not been translated yet so there is only the option of reading it in German. I was perfectly happy to suggest it as he might have been able to speak and read more than one language.

As you are assuming that he didn't then I have to question who is calling whose 'worthiness' into question.

Kevin

Too true, but I always am very careful with all primary sources, as spin is certainly not a late 20th Century invention…read any of Napoleon's writings, the Waterloo dispatch..practically anything.

K

Rob,

We'll have to disagree on this one. Chandler to my mind modeled his book on the Atlas and there is too much 'fluff' that clouds the issue too many times. The Atlas gets straight to the point, argues/demonstrates where Napoleon blew it, and the strategic and operational insight is excellent, something lacking in Campaigns.

That being said, if you don't have both of them, then you're missing out.

Sincerely,
Kevin

Looks like I am getting 3 books! [takes out checkbook]

Take it steady, ghost, leave some cash for figures!

K

I gotta paint my 6mm austrians lol. My 6mm begginer french army is done just gotta finish them austrians…..

bobspruster 03 May 2008 4:00 a.m. PST
''I was in the Army and needed a little peace and quiet, so I went to the base library and plopped-down into the first available easy chair. Turning my head to the shelf beside the chair, there was the book. It was love at first sight. That was 30 plus years ago, but the book and I are still a happy couple''
What library is that?!!!! I have to take my library books back every month.

Military Base Libraries are suprisingly loaded with Napoleonic books, and Ospreys!

When I was on active duty I borrowed tons of Nap books!

Mike

"Well, he said he was interested in the 1805 period."

Ooops, sorry, missed that Ulm and Austerlitz posting. :) Apologies.

"As you are assuming that he didn't then I have to question who is calling whose 'worthiness' into question."

Huh? Nothing personal. Seems around here unless you can read the German texts than you're wasting your time. The endless bricole/Berthier/Napoleon/Charles/Marego arguments drove me away for a long time.

"Rob, We'll have to disagree on this one. Chandler to my mind modeled his book on the Atlas and there is too much 'fluff' "

OK Kevin, we agree to disagree. :) I like 'fluff' occasionally as it's far easier to read than dry numbers and bland statements. Chandler is always an interesting read. I just found that after reading Elting that I wanted more. However, when I wanted to 'see' the action I was reading about I always dragged out the Atlas and read Elting's version while studying the maps.

I agree, if you don't have them, you are missing out. Can't go wrong picking them up. I got my Chandler used so it wasn't a big outlay and I bought Elting on sale at Amazon.

Rob,

I think that might have been Col Elting's point-to encourage his readers to look for more, and then add the 400-odd Recommended Reading List to boot.

I found myself having the same feeling that you did and the same after I read Swords. The Atlas is the reason I kept getting more Napoleonic books. One I looked for and finally found after 40 years of looking-and it's in the Reading List and not an easy one to find.

I do agree with you that Chandler is always interesting.

'Seems around here unless you can read the German texts than you're wasting your time. The endless bricole/Berthier/Napoleon/Charles/Marego arguments drove me away for a long time.'-You're not the only one that felt that way. I do hope you stay around this time.

Sincerely,
Kevin

I can say I own the Atlas myself and value it immensely. I will always have a soft spot for Campaigns and will read it again one day but Atlas is great for following the campaigns and seeing on maps the routes taken and study from while reading Campaigns….If you are lucky to have both as I and many others do you can't go wrong.

Shane