Was the book War and Peace by Tolstoy factual about Napoleon and the war of 1812?
>>1269886
Not really. There's a lot of Anti-Napoleon hate and it's a bit propagandic. Also it protrays Koutouzov as a military genius when Barclay de Tolly was the key behind the defeat of the Emperor during the russian march.
>>1269909
Yes, they shit talk Barclay, but was it because he was a german?
Koutouzov definitely was struggling... I don't think the book makes him sound like a hero, more like a quiet genius. My personal interpretation with Kout. (from the books) is that he lost him mind and just happen to get lucky when the Russian officers began taking over their own men. Ignoring the old general/ faux-prince
>>1269945
No, he was Russian but with a Scottish background and a German speaking upbringing.
>>1269886
Mostly is -- you can Google thew inaccuracies -- but you shouldn't read it for the history, Tolstoy gets preoccupied with philosophizing and then his characters dominate his attention for a while, etc.
If you like literature you'll absolutely love it, one of my favourite books; if you only read history, you might be a bit disappointed.
>romantic First Epilogue breaks my heart
>>1269966
What is a good unbiased book on the war of 1812?
>>1269979
Just look for a modern history that isn't written by a woman. Very few modern histories will be biased, but they are often written badly; and everyone knows that women can't write.
Oxford has some good authoritative histories that might be what you're looking for, but they can be very big books.
The history book market is flooded and there is very few authoritative texts because of this. Not to mention a lot of them have shit writers. I'm reading history coming from a background as a reader of literature, so I'm more than content to hang about with the Reformation-era writers on their topics since those people could write well
.
Every time I stray into the era afterwards I come away disappointed, so I'm often getting pdfs I can torrent online and reading through them quickly and searching online to double check shit that's questionable (i.e. anything a Jew says about the holocaust, anything a biographer of Nixon tries to whitewash because they are obviously in love with his personality, etc.)
Holy shit that's a mess
tl;dr: Try finding a big Oxford history if you want unbiased.
>>1269909
>Napoleon hate
I think Napoleon deserves a lot of the shit he gets.
>>1269945
>I don't think the book makes him sound like a hero
Have you read it recently or a while ago? Tolstoy definitely portrays Kutuzov as something of a genius and hero.
>>1269909
>Anything that praises Russians and criticizes a Western historical figures who had violent inclinations towards them sounds like propaganda.
Have you ever listened to yourselves for a moment?
Historical fiction
>>1269886
It was fairly accurate but gave too much praise to Kutuzov while not mentioning Barclay who deserved much more credit, especially for managing to keep the army alive during the early days of the war.
"For the Russians, the days of Smolensk represented the critical point of the entire campaign. Had the army been beaten there, there results would have been far worse than those of Borodino. Given the direction and the still great superiority of the French, this could have led to a total destruction of the western armies, since there would have been no finite limit for a pursuit. But Barclay had remained steadfast against his fellow field marshal, the tsar's brother, and all the other noisemakers at his headquarters. He thereby saved the army, against its own will, from a catastrophe. His services in behalf of Russia cannot possibly be overestimated. His conduct was as commendable as Bagration's was deplorable." - 1812: Napoleons Russian Campaign, Richard K. Riehn.
tldr: war and peace doesn't give credit where it's due to Barclay and gives too much to Kutuzov, who simply sat back and let things happen for much of the campaign
>>1272269
>gives too much to Kutuzov, who simply sat back and let things happen for much of the campaign
That worked for Tolstoy's narrative of history being set of systems that work without the 'great men'. You can see why he chose to emphasize him.
>>1271823
Great post faggot
