David Hapgood

I know that some do not agree with the facts stated in this book, but to me it shows complete proof that Napoleon was poisoned on orders from the French government. There is just too much evidence showing the murder. The facts have been suppressed by the French because it would be an embarrassment, especially because it was done by someone who was one of the staff of Napoleon who was there with him. The English, too, do not wants the facts known - he was their prisoner. Many years ago, before this book came out (along with "The Assassination of Napoleon"), I wondered how Napoleon, who was still young and healthy, would suddenly become ill and die. His symptoms were not those of cancer, the official cause of death. This is a very interesting book, a must for history buffs. It goes back and forth between the discovery by Sten Forshufvud of the poisoning in the late 20th century and the life of Napoleon on St Helena. The end of Napoleon is very sad, sick and dying with only a few followers....… (mehr)

Nell'inverno del 1944 le truppe alleate che avanzavano lentamente verso Roma si trovarono di fronte la mole gigantesca dell'antica abbazia di Montecassino; un monumento storico inestimabile, colmo di tesori artistici e spirituali. Tra gli uomini bloccati ormai da quasi un mese fra le montagne e sottoposti a pesanti perdite, si andava diffondendo la convinzione che i tedeschi, benché avessero ripetutamente affermato il contrario, avessero trasformato il monastero in una fortezza: ritenevano quindi che fosse indispensabile distruggerlo. Il generale britannico Harold Alexander temette che non bombardarlo potesse costargli il posto anche perché il generale neozelandese Freyberg pretendeva la distruzione dell'abbazia come prezzo per continuare a tenere sul fronte italiano le sue truppe ormai terribilmente provate. Il generale americano Mark Clark, comandante della V armata, sostenne dapprima che il bombardamento era inutile, eppure alla fine diede l'ordine di effettuarlo. Così la mattina del 15 febbraio 1944, in otto ondate, 453 tonnellate di bombe sganciate da 239 bombardieri (il quadruplo di quanto inizialmente richiesto da Freyberg) ridussero l'abbazia a un cumulo di rovine.
Ciò che avvenne quel giorno ha suscitato fin dal primo momento appassionate discussioni che non si sono ancora placate. Il bombardamento è stato definito volta a volta una necessità militare, un crimine di guerra, un errore (perché i tedeschi si installarono fra le macerie, da cui fu loro facile difendersi per altri tre mesi - e perché diede ai nazisti un ottimo elemento di propaganda, e divise l'opinione pubblica americana tra cattolici e protestanti). Ma soltanto oggi è possibile ricostruire veramente la vicenda e le sue complesse motivazioni. E ciò che fa questo libro che prende in esame il comportamento di tutte le parti in causa, e non solo degli alleati: il generale tedesco von Senger, che era un benedettino laico che si batteva brillantemente per una causa in cui non credeva, e i monaci dell'abbazia, che invano chiesero un intervento concreto a Pio XII. Nell'evocazione dell'atmosfera di tragedia in cui gli eventi si prepararono e si svolsero trovano posto anche molti episodi inediti o poco noti: come quello dei soldati della divisione Hermann Goering che posero in salvo tesori senza prezzo, trasportandoli in Vaticano - ma che nascosero quindici casse di opere d'arte da offrire come regalo di còmpleanno a Goering. Il libro, che si basa in larga misura su informazioni di acquisizione recentissima (come documenti militari tenuti segreti per trent'anni) e su interviste a testimoni oculari (tra cui l'ultimo superstite degli ufficiali del comando tedesco), ha suscitato al suo apparire aspre polemiche negli Stati Uniti e in Inghilterra.

Indice: Parte Prima - Presagio; Parte Seconda - Decisione.… (mehr)

Napoleon's death was not without controversy and there is evidence that he may have been poisoned. As a fascinating sidelight to the story of Napoleon, it appears that Count Charles-Tristan de Montholon, an aide to Napoleon and a member of the "pre-Revolutionary aristocracy" poisoned him slowly with arsenic (a poison) on St. Helena (Weider, p. 33).

Napoleon, although it was widely known that he had suffered from physical ailments his entire life (it appears to be the scratching disease, scabies, Napoleon's Glands, Arno Karlen, p. 7), had nonetheless a legendary reputation for work; yet, he succumbed at the relatively young age of 51 thus at the very least his death should raise questions.

At the time of Napoleon's death, the arsenic poisoning went unnoticed and it was not until a Swedish researcher in 1955, Sten Forshufvud, reconstructed the accounts and medical evidence of Napoleon's death that a modern, forensic connection could be established determining that Napoleon was murdered. Montholon had a motive, he was attached to the pre-Revolutionary aristocracy, and he appeared to be an agent of Count d'Artois, brother of King Louis XVIII, and later Charles X in the restored French monarchy who hated the Revolutionary Napoleon (Weider, pp. 144, 254).

Napoleon himself may have sensed something was amiss in his last days. Six days before his death he directed:

"After my death, which cannot be far off. I want you to open my body. . . . I want you to remove my heart, which you will put in spirits of wine and take to Parma, to my dear Marie-Louise [Napoleon's second wife]. . . . I recommend that you examine my stomach particularly carefully; make a precise, detailed report on it, and give it to my son. . . . I charge you to overlook nothing in this examination. . . . I bequeath to all the ruling families the horror and shame of my last moments."

(Wieder, preface).… (mehr)

Considering the fact that Ben Weider was a contributor to this & Assassination at St. Helena Revisited, this [earlier] work has a completely different writing style than his later works making it a lot easier to read. I find it surprising, however, that Forshfvud had not written his account until much later as he had done the preliminary work that was to bring about the conclusions of the Emperor’s death.
All of the people Forshfvud had met while researching his work were enthralled with Napoleon. (Where are these people & where can I meet them??? Mon Dieu, it must be nice to meet & know people that have similar interests as one’s own!)
Overall, the book is a nice prelude to Forshufvud’s Who Killed Napoleon? & Sokoloff’s Napoleon: A Doctor’s Biography, which are always included in the bibliography of the most respectable works of one of the most remarkable people to have lived in the past three hundred years.… (mehr)