Napoleon and Wellington by Andrew Roberts

Three hills and the sea define the limits of the town of Aberystwyth in mid-Wales. Each of the three hills contribute to the unique charm of the town. Constitution Hill has the Cliff Railway, Penglais has the University, and on the top of Pen Dinas is the Wellington Monument. I don't know much about the monument, except that it was built in 1858, represents an upturned cannon, and was intended to carry an equestrian statue of Wellington. By reading this book, I've learned some more about Wellington and his opponent, Napoleon. The book is neither a biography of Napoleon, nor of Wellington, nor a history of Napoleonic campaigns, but a look at what Napoleon and Wellington thought about each other. Inevitably, I came to learn a lot about the history, as the book shows how Napoleon slowly came to know about the existence of Wellington through his actions in the Peninsular Campaigns in Portugal and Spain, and at last acknowledged him as a good general, and how they finally met in the field at Waterloo, Napoleon's bitterness at Wellington for being exiled to St Helena (though Wellington saved his life and had nothing to do with the St Helena decision), and how Wellington's private opinion of Napoleon crumbled when he learned that Napoleon had bequeathed a sum of money to the man who had tried to assassinate him. I now understand a bit better why there is no outright condemnation of Napoleon in the English-speaking world; during his reign Napoleon had the support of the British Whigs (the Liberals of the period) who were pro-reform, therefore anti-royal, and therefore pro-Napoleon. The author says that some of the Whigs that visited Napoleon on Elba might "have blood on their hands", for encouraging his escape and return to power. My favourite quote from the book (by Wellington, on events much later):

It isn't important whether it's Napoleon's government, or the Directors', or Robespierre, or a prince from the house of Bourbon [or an Republican or Democrat President]; whilst this government uses war as a resource, be it political or financial, and that in the country war isn't considered a disgrace, the world Powers without exception have to be on guard. Bonaparte's wars weren't revolutionary. They were wars of conquest; for the object of finance, or generally for reputation. Like they are going to do in Algiers. There is no lack of men in France, like Bonaparte, who could put everything into confusion.

I recommend this book to those seeking an additional view on the period, or for readers interested in the personalities. Do not read it to learn about the politics, the campaigns or the battles. A useful book, I think, and not just another on the pile.