Who Can Napoleon Blame for Waterloo?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- A discussion into the five French officers who I believe should share some of the blame for Napoleon's final campaign.
Sources cited in order of appearance:
The Waterloo Companion - Mark Adkin
Grouchy’s Waterloo - Andrew Field
Waterloo: The French Perspective - Andrew Field
Dictionary of the Napoleonic Wars - David Chandler
The Fall of Napoleon - David Hamilton-Williams
Prelude to Waterloo - Andrew Field
Napoleon as Military Commander - James Marshal-Cornwall
The Campaigns of Napoleon - David Chandler
Waterloo: Myth and Reality - Gareth Glover
Waterloo New Perspectives - David Hamilton-Williams
If you want to support me:
patreon.com/AT...
D'Erlons conduct really smells of subterfuge while looking engaged. At 8pm he shifted backward his 1 Corps as the Prussians were pushing them in just as the Imperial Guard were walking up the ridge of Wellingtons right flank. Mark Adkin conjects this spooked the French line just as much as the Imperial Guard getting hammered ,was
D'Erlon's action throughout the campaign are very strange. He was quick to rally back to the Emperor, suggesting that loyalty was not the issue, but his performance was at times inexcusable for such an experienced officer.
Nice video, congrats! It's also noteworthy to consider that Ney and Soult never liked each other. You can say they were rivals in Spain. I always wonder what was Soult doing during the battle of Waterloo. Makes you wonder if he could have done more. Perhaps send troops to support Ney's cav charge. If it is true that Napoleon was ill that day and preferred to leave command. Choosing Ney was perhaps the only choice. Ney wouldn't obey Soult, and the latter would probably had been uncommitted to win.
Ney tried to duel Soult in Galicia after Soult was chased out of Porto over tactical and strategic decisions; they very much did not like each other.
A very interesting and instructive take on the campaign. Thank you for making it!
Nice work on this! I like the variety of quotes.
Great video and a great channel, keep them coming
Great video, Napoleons biggest mistake was leaving his best General in France. Imagine Davout in charge of the left wing…
Congratulations on an interesting and thought-provoking video. One comment: perhaps you can add the source for the magnificent paintings used throughout the video, for research and perhaps acquisition? Cheers!
Thanks! Most of the pictures were found on Pinterest.
The piece of the jigsaw for Grouchy's advances was Wavre Town was a bottleneck. As there was a thin bridge crossings into a town with a deep ravined creek and buildings that ended up on fire that cost him time and allowed the Prussians to leg it towards Plancenoit. AND he covered the disordered French retreat towards Paris holding off the Prussians and less so any British . Using any Bridge he could defend .If Napoleon knew the battlefield that Wellingtons' Surveyor General picked out ( ie Hougomount, Le Haye sainte, Frischermont, The ridge ) he would have tucked Grouchy into the Waterloo battlefield earlier than when the Prussians arrived block them off coming in and broke Wellingtons Ridge .
My memory is fuzzy but I believe there was also those like Fouché, who tried to play both sides and shared Napoleon’s plans with the allies
Yes, you are correct, Fouché was indeed playing both sides and shared some of Napoleon's plans with the Allies. Probably why Napoleon made multiple!
lol who wouldn’t at that point.
7:42 its not know that Berthier committed suicide the most likely is that he just fell. And more importantly this happened much later as the campaign had already begun. Berthier for personal reasons decided not to join Napoleon.
Personally I'm not sure. With the sill supposedly being about 4ft high, an accident seems unlikely. Given the general situation and dilemma he was in, he could have been driven to heavy drinking I suppose, increasing the chances of a fall, but it still seems doubtful to me. I think suicide or murder are the more likely, but of which is I believe more, I'm not certain. The entire situation is very suspicious.
It definitely could have been just a freak accident, so I wouldn't dismiss it entirely. I'm looking forward to digging more into the event and hopefully gaining a clearer picture at some point.
Thank you, I enjoyed your thoughts, I concur with your conclusions, except you may be a bit harsh on Ney, he was thrown into the deepest of the deep end and left to drown. I think your Number 1 on the list should be Wellington, he was trusted (crucially) by Blucher and he was on the top of his game on that day....IMO.
Upon more reflection I do think you might be right, and I probably would switch Ney and d'Erlon around in my list if I was to make it again now.
In terms of Wellington, whilst I do agree that on the day of the battle of Waterloo he was very good, and deserves much credit for that, in terms of the overall campaign I actually think he is arguably one of Napoleon's biggest helpers. Controversial take perhaps, but Napoleon's army is about half the size of the Allies' combined, and so the only way he can win is to defeat them piecemeal. Thanks to Wellington's complete lethargy and slow movements during the opening two days Napoleon is given the chance at Ligny to face the Prussians unaided, which he fails to take.
In defence of Wellington though he, as you say, was trusted by Blucher, and did a commendable job managing a mixed army of varying quality and multiple languages. He was probably the right man for the job, even if he did drop the ball in the opening stages.
@@ATimeOfEagles I am glad you are not a politician because I agree with nearly all you say, LOL. Your response to my comments are well considered (so clearly not a politician). However, if I may, you say about Wellington 'complete lethargy' ? I know he was slow to react but I think it was more a 'reluctance' to react disguised as lethargy or even as laissez-faire (a well known trait of Wellie) done for probably lots of reasons, some of them maybe political, I believe he understood that his army was 'fragile' and probably, if deployed in full, a one shot weapon.
Haha thanks! I agree that Wellington definitely had many factors to consider (his link with Ostend, protecting the King of France, to name a few), but I just feel that he drops the ball in the opening moments. His lethargy or reluctance, no matter their reasons, almost cost the entire campaign, because if Blucher is soundly beaten at Ligny, then Wellington has to concede Brussels, and who knows where the campaign goes from there, but it would definitely be advantage Napoleon, with both Allied armies further split than ever. Its doubtful Napoleon could win the war, with both Russia and Austria heading towards France, but there are possibilities.
Of course this is all just opinions, but that's the fun of it! Polite discourse is always the way it should be, so thanks for sparking this! :)
The Waterloo campaign has so many fascinating areas to look at, and with mistakes by all the major commanders, as well as multiple key moments that shift momentum, I think it will always spark debate! I have lots of content planned for it, so hopefully we can discuss more in the future!
2 corps driving the Prussians imagine if one corp was assigned inplace of 2
Very well presented sir, my compliments. IMO Napoleon should've directed the battles himself thus ensuring all went to plan and most likely a resounding French victory. Blame can be spread around as you so rightly stated, tho hard to blame D'Erlon at Ligny, being called upon by both Ney, whom was in dire straights, and napoleon, looking for the knockout blow which surely would've happened. The case of disobeying one for the other truly made for the time consuming indecision. had it been myself, upon seeing my distance of making an immediate impact, and asknowledging the superior rank i would've probably, at high risk of course chosen to at least given Ney a third of my corps to the crossroads while sending the rest up the faster route to Ligny. Bourmont shouldv'e been shot had he been found for going over to the Prussians, period. Cudos to the generals whom rode up and down the lines giving their reassurances. Grouchy of course failed big time by not using his scouts properly and on time, and also for not finding a way to intervene instead of chasing Blucher. At Waterloo you failed to mention a great blunder IMO, as to Napoleon's brother Jerome, wasting almost a third of the left at Hougamont, when in reality all he had to do was bottle up the force inside without wasting men. Ney of course, is a given, his actions so tale telling. IMO the biggest failure was Napoleon NOT having Murat, Davout, Berthier & Mortier. he thus could've used Soult and Ney on his center right, Davout to his left which undoubtably would have been smarter than having jerome in charge, as well as Murat's guns to open the gates of Hougamont. Wouldda couldda shouldda i know, but i have no doubt that had those leaders been there at Waterloo it would've been no contest.
Bravest of the brave, not smartest of the smart.
Himself for a damn shit load of reasons. Certainly not Grouchy.
D'Erlon is the guy if u ask me, Ney was from my reading a great tool for Napoleon not a director of great battle plans or good at seeing broad battle plans a good tool not key
The more that I think about it, the more I wonder just what the heck d'Erlon was thinking during this campaign...the decision to turn his corps around when on the edge of the Ligny battlefield, surely knowing that he wouldn't reach Ney until nightfall, just blows my mind. Hopefully future research offers answers, but we'll see!
I don’t think there’s a single reason.. or person to blame. Boney had treachery in Paris to.contend with, which is why Davout was left in charge, to not surrender the city to the Assembly.
If Davout had been at Quatre Bras he would have smashed Wellington.
Grouchy was new and inexperienced. He didn’t interpret Boney’s order with any tactical expertise and allowed the Prussians to get past him towards Waterloo, and further more block his path to the battle.
Ney was exhibiting signs of PTSD.. and Boney himself was unwell, having not slept, gotten soaked the day before and possibly suffering from the stomach cancer that would eventually kill him.
Biggest lack off the field was Berthier, who instinctively knew what Boney wanted and was able to articulate it.. Soult was imprecise and vague by comparison.
Biggest lack on the field was the King of Naples, Murat.. who had offers his assistance but Boney had forbidden to set foot in France. With Murat at Waterloo, Wellington would have been slaughtered.
I feel if Boney was not I’ll, he would have been able to keep a better control over proceedings... but his Marshall’s and generals overall performed only averagely.
I don’t buy that Wellington was a genius that day.. he picked the ground and used up his men to hold it until the Prussians arrived. Even a drummer boy could have done that.
Good analysis, I think the reputation pf Wellington has been greatly excegerated due to the victory at Waterloo. He was certainly a good general but Waterloo was still very winnable for Napoleon, and it was a close run thing despite the mistakes that Napoleon made.
the limeys we're lucky the Prussians had their six
Napoleon appointed his subordinates. The buck stops with him. The fish rots from the head.
I disagree, with his return he could waste much time if any. He had to act quickly and it is better the ally you know then the one you don't- and he had little to no time.
@@thatdoppioguy1825 Bonaparte dictated the timing of his return in the full knowledge that it would almost certainly revive the coalition against him. After 15 years as head of government, he knew the resources he had available better than anyone else. He chose his subordinates, and where and when to strike. The nature of dictatorship is that the dictator necessarily has to carry the can for any mistakes because ultimately all decision making is his. The buck stops with Bonaparte. The fish rots from the head.
@@markaxworthy2508 This is not true at all. Fish usually starts rotting from inside out. Especially the organs are probably the first things which start rotting. You know nothing.
I don’t understand what he was thinking returning while the rest of Europe’s leaders were literally in a room together negotiating treaty and able to quickly organize..
@@SklLLLY Ego?
So, maybe video about most controversial Allied commander of 1815: Prince of Orange?
Not sure if it will warrant its own video (maybe), but I do definitely feel that his reputation deserves recalibrating. He receives too much blame and too little credit for his actions in my opinion, and I intend to give him what I deem to be a fairer assessment when I get to the Waterloo campaign.
I also firmly believe in the holistic view that Napoleon would still wouldn’t have kept his throne even if he won Waterloo. By that point, the momentum, infrastructure and talent he had wielded in 1805 was long gone.
1. Lannes and Bessiere were dead.
2. Berthier, Marmont, Bernadotte and Murat had all sided with his enemies at that point.
3. Macdonald, Lefebvre, Oudinot, Mortier and Massena were either too old, too disgraced or had outright refused to fight for him.
4. Davout and Soult, two of his more competent and independently minded commanders, were sent to be administrators to scrounge together a barely cohesive army.
5. Ney was too reckless and Grouchy too deferential for either to be trusted with independent command.
6. Napoleons court and army was also now riddled with royalist spies.
I think Napoleon fell to depression during the battle the whole thing I believe was falling apart and the boss with his skill set I believe already knew it was done. He succombed to his human frailty and quit the game. It must have seen pointless around mid day for Napoleon.
Berthier was likely murdered
Or just an accident
@@hermanoguimaraes6343 Yeah, one of those "Putin Accidents"?
Wellington didnt win the battle, Napoleon lost it. In the end though it probably wouldnt have mattered, the odds were stacked against him.
Napoleon's reason for handing over to Ney has never been explained by any other staff in his camp. One reason I heard with no primary source was he had intestinal or Bowel or Piles issues. He certainly died of a stomach cancer on St Helena. But surely a dramatic health concern should have been repeated by eye witnesses? Ney did see Wellington rearrange his lines on the rifge on the Brussels Road and that made Ney Jump at the chance , but Ive read letters that Further Guard cavalry just joined in 2nd 3rd waves as not to miss any action -undisciplined commanders no less. Suggestion ? Too many old generals had too much PTSD by this battle anyway?
Good video
Grouchy; also Wellington and the British and its allies had something to do with it, as Longstreet said about the federal troops and the South's loss at Gettysburg.
Which Longstreet really didn't help DID HE, so misery loves company?
Citing Longstreet as an 'expert' is fitting ONLY if you include him as an example of the butt-hurt subordinate performing BELOW what was expected from them!
Vandame should have been appointed Marshal instead of Grouchy.
Probably, although I think that he could have given either Vandamme or Gerard their batons along with making Grouchy marshal. Then promote Girard to Corps commander, either Vandamme or Gerard to command the Right Wing, and keep Grouchy as Reserve Cavalry commander where he would do a fine job
Erm Wellington obviously. Sour apples.
Its Napoleons FAULT!!! He gave roles not suited for their “talent”.
1) Leaving Davout and Suchet to do minor roles when they’re literally his best marshals who can do both field and independent command.
2) Putting Soult on a role he is not best suited, he should have been given overall tactical command of the army at Waterloo not Ney, he faced against Wellesley multiple times, why Ney? Soult delayed the invasion by 12 hrs going with the Mons plan and not the Charleroi plan.
3) Giving Ney a bigger role more than he could handle, he was best suited for corps command on either flanks but he was given overall tactical command of the army.
4) Making Grouchy a marshal and giving him independent command. Gerard was better in all aspects save only cavalry command. Gerard should have been given that assignment and Grouchy as cavalry commander, his best role.
Extra filler: D’ Erlon is an idiot!
Generally I agree with much of your thinking here, and I do put most of the blame on Napoleon, he did choose his commanders poorly. However, I do have a few thoughts if you're interested.
1) Whilst no doubt both Davout and Suchet would have done far better jobs, its difficult to say that he should absolutely have taken them with him. After the fiasco in 1814, he needed someone he could trust to hold Paris, and Davout was that man. He also needed someone to delay the Austrians, and Suchet was both capable and trustworthy. There are few else who could do either of those roles unfortunately.
2+3) Soult as chief of staff does seem questionable, even if he did have experience in the role. In terms of him facing Wellington, his record is worse than Ney's to be honest. As you can see from the video I'm very critical of Ney, especially for his performance at Waterloo, but at least he does beat Wellington at Quatre Bras and arguably had bested him in rear-guard actions in 1811, which is more than Soult's record could boast. Ney was out of his depth though, I agree.
4) I totally agree here, he should probably have promoted one or both of either Gerard or Vandamme to Marshal, and then give them (or both) the wings, and leave Ney in charge of the Guard. Promoting Grouchy to Marshal was fine, he had deserved it imo, but as you say he was a cavalry commander, and giving him independent command, not only hampered the left wing, but it also left the Reserve Cavalry without a proper commander at Waterloo, thus allowing Ney to waste it in fruitless attacks.
The leadership debate for the campaign is such a fun subject to consider, and I love reading other peoples thoughts on it, so thanks for sharing!
@@ATimeOfEagles this quote still resonates
“The emperor gained Suchet too late, lost Lannes too early and didn't use Davout when he needed him most"
Great post BTW, keep up the good work 👍
You,couldnt give Ney command of an Armee,if Ney didnt kill off the whole Cavalry reserve.Second,Napoleon shouldnt have,detached Grouchy hw cpuld have but kept him close enough to support at Waterloo,as was he went of on his own,ride but following Napoleons weak order.
personally i believe all the commanders in napoleons army were double sided, they fought with napoleon but were half hearted. Just like the Austrians in Russia they fought the Russians on Napoleons side but they did all they could to avoid a proper battle with them. The Saxons who were with the Austrians complained about this. Other than Marshal Ney who was serious in helping Napoleon he payed with his life for this. Who knows if Grouchy, Soult and others were in deed going on for a ride but behind Napoleon plotted his defeat with the allies. Grouchy failed to carry out multiple orders from Napoleon whys that? Soult also failed in his duty, whys that? The reason napoleon failed was cuz he was betrayed.
Blame an Indonesian volcano 🌋
There is a scientific theory that caused the heavy night rain to delay Napoleon’s morning attack towards noon. The volcano of Mount Tambora in Indonesia had erupted in April that year. In summary; the volcanic ashes and plumes in the atmosphere caused more darker clouds and more rain in Europe. Its long term effects caused the “year without a summer” in 1816.
But in my personal opinion, the French army organization was not at its best anymore.
(Shout out to Indonesia 🇮🇩 )
Himself !
Who made the fewest mistakes?!😂
I mean i've not studied the campaign but given everything I wanna say Blücher XDDDD
@HyperSonicX Good call! However, being from the UK, I find that' The Weather' had a good couple of days!🤩👍
No, no, it was a horse that was a spy for the British. The horse was running back and forth informing Wellington of Napolibear's plan. That's right, Napoleon was not present at Waterloo, it was Napolibear.
lol
Himself?
ya right like old napoleon will ever admit to that
Napoleon's only luck was not having the poltroon and traitor Bernadotte on the scene.
He was no traitor though, not in Napoleons eyes at least.