Revolution 1792

This is a very good book - better than most books on Tomato. Some people say that it is written like a "General History of the World", but this makes me feel more immersed in opening the history book - it doesn't feel like a novel to me, but the protagonist who really returns to that turbulent era, the author who records the true story and me who is watching the history.

I don't know why the rating is so low. For an old bookworm, this is a novel worth reading carefully. I highly recommend it!

It can be said that this book is different from other historical travel novels. It is very rigorous and very true. I don't know which historical master wrote the book. If there is a sequel, please call me.

The revolution needs iron and blood to complete. It was annoying to watch. It's a good material, but the content is terrible. I know why it only got 8 points.

Let me give three stars. Let me explain why I gave three stars instead of four or five stars. There are advantages and disadvantages. The advantages are the like. The subject matter is something I have seen relatively few before, which means that basically no one writes about this kind of subject matter, so I would like to encourage you. But the reason why I only give three stars is because you, as an ordinary person, have traveled through time. Shouldn't time travellers have golden fingers? There is nothing, it is written like a history book, is it necessary? You abdicated... What right do you have to change everything after abdicating? If you have no power, who will listen to you?

The story line is all over the place, just like playing the novel as a game. Although what you wrote is fictional, the background is clear. In that background, especially as a royal family, it is impossible for you to be allowed to do this. Just messing around and exhilarating the patient.

This book is okay. It feels a little inappropriate for the protagonist to bring modern consciousness to the 18th century. At that time, human lives were at a loss, but the protagonist emphasized that the army should obey the will of the people. It was too advanced. In comparison, Napoleon was more suitable for that era, but Napoleon was not perfect.

It's well written, but it looks laborious.

For the protagonist, he can only be talkative and fun-loving. At the beginning, it was a crisis, and he could only choose to trust others. After he had the power, others could steal his property, and there were few people whom the protagonist trusted who were loyal to him. And the biggest drawback was that there was no need to write too many Chinese people in that period. The protagonist even pulled a large number of people from the Qing Dynasty. Even if he pulled them out, they were very close to him. What did the French people around you think?

The writing is very good. It can be seen that the author's writing level is very good and the content is in-depth, but there are still some shortcomings. Advantages 1. Wonderful plot, constant reversals, constant faction fights, reflecting the difficulties of the revolution (there are too many conspirators, and I want to mess with the protagonist every day) 2. The characters are well created, and the various features of people during the French Revolution are described, whether they are blind or cunning or cowardly, even those who trust them will betray, and hostile people will unite for a common purpose. Together, just like the most aggressive priest in the original history, he will be subdued by the protagonist's purpose and resist his own class. The three protagonists are kings, focusing on technological development, and have the pleasure of technological crushing; there are many military strategies, not only pardoning hostile forces to reduce the awareness of resistance, but also protecting the people and planning their resistance, thereby breaking through the enemy's city defenses. Disadvantage 1: There are too many historical figures and no relevant explanations. Sometimes it is quite confusing and can only be understood by senior Western history enthusiasts. 2. The protagonist is carrying out a large-scale purge of those who are dissident in his own power, but the enemy is looking for dirty information and is exiled to the colony. Can't emm just learn from Robespierre and behead him?