You know that I consider Cronin's opinions as rubbish and that I explained my reasons for that at length in my review. I won't go back over it now. I invited you at the time to counter my arguments and you never did.

>'Like' is one thing, and is mostly irrelevant especially regarding Napoleon; defamation and lying are quite a different matter. Currying favor by defamation is yet another.<

You made that statement for which you have not shown any supporting evidence. I have read Mme Remusat's memoirs, though not recently enough to quote, and I suggest that you do the same and come up with the statements you consider defamatory. I have already pointed out that the publication date proves that she did not write to 'curry favour' and I would like to know which of the authors you mention did actually publish before 1830.

If I understand you correctly you were blaming the individuals who had served Napoleon so ghost written stuff like Bourrienne and Constant is only blameable in that they lent their name to it - and probably did so for cash rather than for political favour.

Let me make it clear that I would be perfectly happy to see a biography of Napoleon written without any use of memoirs, though it might be a bit boring: what I don't like is cherry-picking and claiming that any writer whose opinions one disagrees with is 'unreliable'.

Susan