Negative Positive
Title: Who needs Wellington when there is Schom?
Review: Having read other biographies of Napoleon, and having just driven over the col de Saint Bernard, I was really looking forward to this book. The details are almost all there, but coloured with such a jaundiced view that the great man has been dragged down. Schom concentrates on the gory, the downsides, neglecting the triumphs and genuine achievements or casting such a doubt on them you begin to wonder why other authors have made such a fuss. He presents Napoleon as a Himmler or Hitler rather than a Patton or Caesar. I have rarely read a biography which was so negative towards it's principal.
Is the review positive or negative? 