Waterloo: Napoleon’s Last Gamble

Here reviewed by “Aleix”, who writes book reviews under the pseudonym “bookholic” on the amazon.co.uk website.

His email is: aleixdorcaarquitecte@andorra.ad
Peter Hicks, January, 2006

“Hopelessly too short … and helpless maps…  September 13, 2005 
I know the purpose was to resume and have a “compact” tale.
I know it was suposed to be a “little” book.
In my edition the map where the main attacks or phases of the battle are drawn is wrong (the numbers 2 and 5 are transposed so D'Erlon's attack and the Garde Imperiale final effort are obviously out of place…) How such mistakes happen in maps I will never understand… it really makes me shiver… who edits/surveys those things?.
Why so many anecdotes (all published before).
Why inform us of the number of females present at the Duchess of Richmond ball… and even the dozen or so who were not engaged… (funnily enough the only “new” data I did not know about beforehand… how this “important fact” influenced the battle of Waterloo is not explained though…)
I can recommend a lot of books about Waterloo or the 100 days or the Campaign… unfortunately this is not one of them.
The same old pictures,
The same old thesis and arguments… and even demythifications (again!… they are not original at all). Some comments are NOT in the positive… I mean why lose space in a “little” book telling this or that did not happen like this… GO TO THE POINT!… too much rambling for my taste.
I was promised a clever essay by the editorial review… well it is not. The Prologue promises one thing and the text delivers another…
I hope someone corrects the blatant mistakes in its maps (perhaps in next editions?). But all in all hardly valuable except as a fast read (about two hours will be enough…) that is why the two stars.
Quite disappointed I was expecting much more than this.”

See also the online review by Hazel Mills, fellow of Girton College, Cambridge, in the british newspaper, The Guardian.