| + + — | Critic. 47: 92. Jl. ‘05. 190w. |
“Smoothness of style ... Though this volume is of such high merit that it will take a place at once as one of the recognized authorities on its subject, it is not likely that all its positions will be accepted without a demur.” Herbert W. Horwill.
| + + — | Forum. 36: 407. Ja. ‘05. 1970w. |
“The title of this book is more philosophical than the contents warrant; instead of obtaining one final impression, we remember the separate remarks—often wise, suggestive and illuminating—on separate authors.”
| + + | Ind. 58: 1016. My. 4, ‘05. 260w. | |
| R. of Rs. 31: 250. F. ‘05. 130w. |
“Its author seems wholly destitute of any pretension to critical discernment. The diction and style, as might be expected, are on a par with the rest of the book. It is scandalous that a great university like Cambridge should tolerate such standards of information and criticism as this volume exhibits.”
| — — — | Sat. R. 99: 704. My. 27, ‘05. 1960w. |
Wertheimer, Edward von. Duke of Reichstadt. [**]$5. Lane.
Dr. Wertheimer’s monograph on the Duke of Reichstadt makes use of a vast deal of new biographical material. The study covers the political setting of the life in detail, painstakingly going over the whole piece of statecraft involved in Napoleon’s Austrian marriage, dwelling at length upon the influence which the alliance exerted upon the policy of Napoleon and of his opponents. The short uneventful life of Napoleon’s son is of less interest than the stirring history which the father tried to shape for the glory of a permanent kingdom. “It is to the fact that he was his father’s son that the fame of the Duke of Reichstadt is due ... the shadow of a great name surrounds him, and historical writers record and discuss his every act as if he had been a real king, instead of merely the If, Yes, and Perhaps of Modern European history.” (N. Y. Times.)
| + + — | Acad. 68: 1124. O. 28, ‘05. 1780w. |