Dmitry Merezhkovsky, born 1865 in St. Petersburg, co-founder of the Symbolist movement, was granted 1919 permission by Lunacharsky to leave Russia with his wife, the poetess and Symbolist co-founder Zinaida Gippius ; they went into exile, eventually living in Paris (M. had strong interest in French literature and had gained a PhD on Montaigne).

His biography of Napoleon seems to have been first published in 1928 (where?), the year of the first German edition. I did not find any information that this work has ever been translated into English (could this omission be because M. writes passionately about England’s arch-enemy?).
The first part deals with Napoleons life, which he compares to the movement of the sun from the rise in the morning, the midday zenith (1799-1807) to the evening twilight and finally night: his death on St. Helena.
In the second part he tries to give us a glimpse into Napoleon’s soul. An almost impossible undertaking, he says: the by then more than 40,000 books give infinite information about his wars, his politics, etc., but – quoting Stendhal – ‘the more we learn about him the less we know him’, so that the 40,000 books become 40,000 tombstones for the ‘unknown soldier’.

He writes: to penetrate another soul is impossible – we don’t even know our own – but one can at least approach its realm. But with Napoleon it seems to be impossible. M. quotes a politician who knew him well but did not count himself among his admirers: “I cannot compare the feeling I have in the presence of this colossal being with those in the presence of anybody else.” He seems to be among us as is Gulliver among the Lilliputians. Madame de Staël : “A being without equal, he was more and less than a human – he carried the stamp of an alien nature”. M. sets out to fathom this, his alien nature, in all its strange and often contradictory actions and features. M. references literature up to 1921, among it memoires by those who had met and known Napoleon; he quotes from them as well as from Napoleons own writings. His admiring as well as critical account makes absorbing reading.
Napoleon wished to unite Europe, to create an ‘association européenne’ with common European laws, common measures, common monetary system, a common home for all. It was not to be. The defeat of Napoleon left a plethora of national states soon to be at each other’s throats. How different would have been the 20th century and the world today! And the English still celebrate Trafalgar and Waterloo! (VII / VIII-15) ( )

Lorsque Dimitri Merejkovski se penche sur le personnage de Napoléon - qu'il suit de la naissance à la mort -, il voit un homme profondément humain face au vent de l'Histoire. Orgueilleux, insatisfait, fils et fossoyeur de la Révolution, Napoléon se bat au nom d'idéaux de liberté, met l'Europe à feu et à sang, élève la France malgré elle avant de la plonger dans la misère et l'anéantissement. Si Léonard incarne le génie dans Le roman de Léonard de Vinci, Napoléon est ici l'ambition humaine, vécue jusqu'à l'extrême. Dévoré par la démesure de son talent, il connaît in fine la rédemption salvatrice. La vie hors norme de l'Empereur est, pour le grand écrivain russe, une terre glaise dont on sculpte les titans. Ce n'est pas seulement la force, c'est aussi la fragilité de l'élu du destin qui frappe dans cet ouvrage. L'homme Napoléon devient alors l'Homme seul, seul face à Dieu, seul dans la déchirante nudité de sa grandeur. Et l'on sort de cette lecture ébloui par le talent d'un auteur capable de rendre émouvant, vivant, humain, un destin aussi statufié que celui de Napoléon.

NG-2