Gregory Fremont-Barnes

Oh, boy! Osprey starts its new Command range with a stinker of epic proportions. The editors at Osprey should feel ashamed for having published such a shoddy piece of work. Already the blurb about "a military account of Napoleon's martial career" hints at the troubles to come (martial - related to Mars, the god of war, hence synonymous to military).

Nobody at Osprey cared enough to actually read the booklet. On p. 20, for instance, general Kienmeyer is spelled both Kienmeyer and Keinmeyer. show more About Austerlitz, they say on p. 19, "against 89,000 Allied troops, of whom about 16,000 were Russians and the remaining Austrians, ..." No, no, no. Most of the Austrian army had been captured at Ulm. Even a shred of Napoleonic knowledge should prevent such blunders. Even basic reading comprehension might have caught a few.

Why they expect lay readers to understand their short accounts of the battles of Austerlitz and Waterloo is beyond me. Even their Osprey campaign titles can not do justice to these battles. Trying to condense them further is futile. I challenge anyone to understand the battle of Austerlitz as told in the text.

The top of the title page lists "leadership, strategy, conflict". None of this can be found in the table of content. This title is a bastardization of an Osprey Campaign and an Osprey Essential History. What a waste of a concept, as the material exists. One could have taken Colonel Vachée's brilliant account of "Napoleon at work", which shows a real commander at his job, and combine this with Hubert Camon's explanation of Napoleon's strategic tricks of "les manoeuvres sur les derrières" and "la position centrale".

To add insult to injury in this train wreck, the man in the commissioned paintings does not even look like Napoleon. Osprey used to be about making military history accessible. It looks like they are trying to make it dumb now. Someone deserves a severe spanking (unfortunately, as they are British, they would probably enjoy it). A painful read. Buyers beware. show less

For some time now –especially after reading the Sharpe series- I’ve been looking for a succinct but thorough history covering the Peninsula War. I then came across Osprey’s “Essential Histories: The Peninsula War” by Gregory Fremont-Barnes in the one dollar or less bin at the local Half-Price books and snapped it up, I am very happy I did so. Mr. Fremont-Barnes reviews the Peninsula campaign and its multifaceted effects with a clear voice and avoids a number of the blasé pitfalls show more of other historians I’ve read. What I especially enjoyed were the clear maps and battle plans, that this edition also included some delving into art history, with a small treatise on Goya, added a three-dimensional panache I wasn’t expecting. I picked up the two Essential Histories that were available but I will be checking the shelves for the other editions on my next visit. show less

This book takes an in-depth look at the siege, revealing the political background behind it and analysing the controversial decision by the Prime Minister to sign over control of the streets of London to the military. The artwork illustrates the moment the walls were breached and shows how the strict planning of the operation was critical to its success. With input from those involved in the mission, the author strips away some of the mystery behind the best counter-terrorism unit in the show more world and their most famous raid. show less

“The Napoleonic Wars (4): The Fall of the French Empire” by Gregory Fremont-Barnes is the final book in Osprey’s Essential Histories Napoleonic Wars series and is an excellent brief overview of the final years of the Napoleonic Era. Mr. Fremont Barnes is quite succinct in getting to the heart of the battles, their dynamics, individual players including personal tribulations and foibles. That he is able to accomplish this task in such a quick and concise manner while being informative show more and entertaining is a grand sign of an accomplished historian. Personally I would rather that Mr. Fremont-Barnes had reconstructed a different early nineteenth century city rather than London, perhaps Paris, but that’s me being nitpicky. show less