What do you think?
Rate this book
Waterloo: The True Story of Four Days, Three Armies and Three Battles
‘Some battles change nothing. Waterloo changed almost everything.’
Bestselling author Bernard Cornwell is celebrated for his ability to bring history to life. Here, in his first work of non-fiction, he has written the true story of the epic battle of Waterloo – a momentous turning point in European history – a tale of one campaign, four days and three armies.
He focuses on what it was like to be fighting in that long battle, whether officer or private, whether British, Prussian or French; he makes you feel you are present at the scene. The combination of his vivid, gripping style and detailed historical research make this, his first non-fiction book, the number one book for the upcoming 200th anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo.
It is a magnificent story. There was heroism on both sides, tragedy too and much misery. Bernard Cornwell brings those combatants back to life, using their memories to recreate what it must have been like to fight in one of the most ghastly battles of history. It was given extra piquancy because all of Europe reckoned that the two greatest soldiers of the age were Napoleon and Wellington, yet the two had never faced each other in battle. Both were acutely aware of that, and aware that history would judge them by the result. In the end it was a victory for Wellington, but when he saw the casualty lists he wept openly. ‘I pray to God,’ he said, ‘I have fought my last battle.’ He had, and it is a story for the ages.
Bestselling author Bernard Cornwell is celebrated for his ability to bring history to life. Here, in his first work of non-fiction, he has written the true story of the epic battle of Waterloo – a momentous turning point in European history – a tale of one campaign, four days and three armies.
He focuses on what it was like to be fighting in that long battle, whether officer or private, whether British, Prussian or French; he makes you feel you are present at the scene. The combination of his vivid, gripping style and detailed historical research make this, his first non-fiction book, the number one book for the upcoming 200th anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo.
It is a magnificent story. There was heroism on both sides, tragedy too and much misery. Bernard Cornwell brings those combatants back to life, using their memories to recreate what it must have been like to fight in one of the most ghastly battles of history. It was given extra piquancy because all of Europe reckoned that the two greatest soldiers of the age were Napoleon and Wellington, yet the two had never faced each other in battle. Both were acutely aware of that, and aware that history would judge them by the result. In the end it was a victory for Wellington, but when he saw the casualty lists he wept openly. ‘I pray to God,’ he said, ‘I have fought my last battle.’ He had, and it is a story for the ages.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published September 11, 2014
About the author
Bernard Cornwell
458 books17.8k followersCornwell was born in London in 1944. His father was a Canadian airman, and his mother, who was English, a member of the Women's Auxiliary Air Force. He was adopted and brought up in Essex by the Wiggins family, who were members of the Peculiar People, a strict Protestant sect who banned frivolity of all kinds and even medicine. After he left them, he changed his name to his birth mother's maiden name, Cornwell.
Cornwell was sent away to Monkton Combe School, attended the University of London, and after graduating, worked as a teacher. He attempted to enlist in the British armed services at least three times but was rejected on the grounds of myopia.
He then joined BBC's Nationwide and was promoted to become head of current affairs at BBC Northern Ireland. He then joined Thames Television as editor of Thames News. He relocated to the United States in 1980 after marrying an American. Unable to get a green card, he started writing novels, as this did not require a work permit.
As a child, Cornwell loved the novels of C.S. Forester, chronicling the adventures of fictional British naval officer Horatio Hornblower during the Napoleonic Wars, and was surprised to find there were no such novels following Lord Wellington's campaign on land. Motivated by the need to support himself in the U.S. through writing, Cornwell decided to write such a series. He named his chief protagonist Richard Sharpe, a rifleman involved in most major battles of the Peninsular War.
Cornwell wanted to start the series with the Siege of Badajoz but decided instead to start with a couple of "warm-up" novels. These were Sharpe's Eagle and Sharpe's Gold, both published in 1981. Sharpe's Eagle was picked up by a publisher, and Cornwell got a three-book deal. He went on to tell the story of Badajoz in his third Sharpe novel, Sharpe's Company, published in 1982.
Cornwell and wife Judy co-wrote a series of novels, published under the pseudonym "Susannah Kells". These were A Crowning Mercy, published in 1983, Fallen Angels in 1984, and Coat of Arms (aka The Aristocrats) in 1986. (Cornwell's strict Protestant upbringing informed the background of A Crowning Mercy, which took place during the English Civil War.) In 1987, he also published Redcoat, an American Revolutionary War novel set in Philadelphia during its 1777 occupation by the British.
After publishing eight books in his ongoing Sharpe series, Cornwell was approached by a production company interested in adapting them for television. The producers asked him to write a prequel to give them a starting point to the series. They also requested that the story feature a large role for Spanish characters to secure co-funding from Spain. The result was Sharpe’s Rifles, published in 1987, and a series of Sharpe television films staring Sean Bean.
A series of contemporary thrillers with sailing as a background and common themes followed: Wildtrack published in 1988, Sea Lord (aka Killer's Wake) in 1989, Crackdown in 1990, Stormchild in 1991, and Scoundrel, a political thriller, in 1992.
In June 2006, Cornwell was made an Officer of the Order of the British Empire in the Queen's 80th Birthday Honours List.
Cornwell's latest work, Azincourt, was released in the UK in October 2008. The protagonist is an archer who participates in the Battle of Agincourt, another devastating defeat suffered by the French in the Hundred Years War. However, Cornwell has stated that it will not be about Thomas of Hookton from The Grail Quest or any of his relatives.
Cornwell was sent away to Monkton Combe School, attended the University of London, and after graduating, worked as a teacher. He attempted to enlist in the British armed services at least three times but was rejected on the grounds of myopia.
He then joined BBC's Nationwide and was promoted to become head of current affairs at BBC Northern Ireland. He then joined Thames Television as editor of Thames News. He relocated to the United States in 1980 after marrying an American. Unable to get a green card, he started writing novels, as this did not require a work permit.
As a child, Cornwell loved the novels of C.S. Forester, chronicling the adventures of fictional British naval officer Horatio Hornblower during the Napoleonic Wars, and was surprised to find there were no such novels following Lord Wellington's campaign on land. Motivated by the need to support himself in the U.S. through writing, Cornwell decided to write such a series. He named his chief protagonist Richard Sharpe, a rifleman involved in most major battles of the Peninsular War.
Cornwell wanted to start the series with the Siege of Badajoz but decided instead to start with a couple of "warm-up" novels. These were Sharpe's Eagle and Sharpe's Gold, both published in 1981. Sharpe's Eagle was picked up by a publisher, and Cornwell got a three-book deal. He went on to tell the story of Badajoz in his third Sharpe novel, Sharpe's Company, published in 1982.
Cornwell and wife Judy co-wrote a series of novels, published under the pseudonym "Susannah Kells". These were A Crowning Mercy, published in 1983, Fallen Angels in 1984, and Coat of Arms (aka The Aristocrats) in 1986. (Cornwell's strict Protestant upbringing informed the background of A Crowning Mercy, which took place during the English Civil War.) In 1987, he also published Redcoat, an American Revolutionary War novel set in Philadelphia during its 1777 occupation by the British.
After publishing eight books in his ongoing Sharpe series, Cornwell was approached by a production company interested in adapting them for television. The producers asked him to write a prequel to give them a starting point to the series. They also requested that the story feature a large role for Spanish characters to secure co-funding from Spain. The result was Sharpe’s Rifles, published in 1987, and a series of Sharpe television films staring Sean Bean.
A series of contemporary thrillers with sailing as a background and common themes followed: Wildtrack published in 1988, Sea Lord (aka Killer's Wake) in 1989, Crackdown in 1990, Stormchild in 1991, and Scoundrel, a political thriller, in 1992.
In June 2006, Cornwell was made an Officer of the Order of the British Empire in the Queen's 80th Birthday Honours List.
Cornwell's latest work, Azincourt, was released in the UK in October 2008. The protagonist is an archer who participates in the Battle of Agincourt, another devastating defeat suffered by the French in the Hundred Years War. However, Cornwell has stated that it will not be about Thomas of Hookton from The Grail Quest or any of his relatives.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 790 reviews
October 18, 2018
Cornwell does nothing new here. And he even asks himself the essential question: why another book on Waterloo?
His answer is simple: he wants to tell the story himself. There’s no shortage of books written on it, and he has even written a fiction novel centred on it, but he wants to cast his voice out there to examine the facts. Cornwell has previously written only historical fiction, no non-fiction, so I was excited to see him try his hand and something a little bit different. And it’s a terrify foray into the genre. I’d love to see him do it again, perhaps on Arthurian Britain.
I digress here, but the point is Waterloo was a terribly important battle that shaped much of the nineteenth century. Imagine if Napoleon has won. How different would the world have been. It’s an interesting concept. So I really enjoyed reading about how close the battle was, how easily it could have been turned in Napoleon’s favour or how he most certainly would have triumphed if the Prussian’s didn’t arrive to back the British. I find Napoleon an immensely interesting historical figure, and I would have liked the narrative to focus on him a little more though I think that’s my own bias speaking. Next year I intent to read Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts which I’m really looking forward to sinking my teeth into.
-Napoleon at Waterloo
Cornwell’s skill as a novelist came through when he was piecing together the narratives and journal entries of common soldiers together, told side by side with the larger scale details of the battle. And as such it felt like a full image of the battle was captured here. The illustrations are also fantastic and really help to bring everything to life. It’s a fantastic looking book, I recommend the hardback version because it looks and feels so much better.
So this is worth reading if you don’t know much about the details of the battle (like I didn’t) but I couldn’t imagine that someone who knows a lot about it would find much interest here. Unless they’re looking for debate and discussion over the battle’s possibilities, though I personally wouldn’t want to read another book about the battle after reading this one. Ones enough for me.
His answer is simple: he wants to tell the story himself. There’s no shortage of books written on it, and he has even written a fiction novel centred on it, but he wants to cast his voice out there to examine the facts. Cornwell has previously written only historical fiction, no non-fiction, so I was excited to see him try his hand and something a little bit different. And it’s a terrify foray into the genre. I’d love to see him do it again, perhaps on Arthurian Britain.
I digress here, but the point is Waterloo was a terribly important battle that shaped much of the nineteenth century. Imagine if Napoleon has won. How different would the world have been. It’s an interesting concept. So I really enjoyed reading about how close the battle was, how easily it could have been turned in Napoleon’s favour or how he most certainly would have triumphed if the Prussian’s didn’t arrive to back the British. I find Napoleon an immensely interesting historical figure, and I would have liked the narrative to focus on him a little more though I think that’s my own bias speaking. Next year I intent to read Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts which I’m really looking forward to sinking my teeth into.
-Napoleon at Waterloo
Cornwell’s skill as a novelist came through when he was piecing together the narratives and journal entries of common soldiers together, told side by side with the larger scale details of the battle. And as such it felt like a full image of the battle was captured here. The illustrations are also fantastic and really help to bring everything to life. It’s a fantastic looking book, I recommend the hardback version because it looks and feels so much better.
So this is worth reading if you don’t know much about the details of the battle (like I didn’t) but I couldn’t imagine that someone who knows a lot about it would find much interest here. Unless they’re looking for debate and discussion over the battle’s possibilities, though I personally wouldn’t want to read another book about the battle after reading this one. Ones enough for me.
May 27, 2024
History rarely provides such a striking confrontation. The two greatest soldiers of the era, two men who had never fought against each other, were now gathering armies just 160 miles apart. The world’s conqueror was in Paris while the conqueror of the world’s conqueror was in Brussels.
Beginning with Napoléon’s escape from Elba and his return to France, the book chronicles the events of the decisive battle of Waterloo which was fought between the French army and the Anglo-Allied army led by the Duke of Wellington and Marshal Blücher.
"The art of war does not need complicated manoeuvre; the simplest are the best, and common sense is fundamental. From which one might wonder why generals make blunders; it is because they try to be clever. The most difficult thing is to guess the enemy’s plan, to find the truth from all the reports. The rest merely requires common sense; it is like a boxing match, the more you punch the better it is."
-Napoléon
The book ends by France’s defeat and Napoléon’s exile to St. Helena.
Then they were ready. The drums began again, beating the pas de charge, the Eagles flew bright above the tricolour flags, the guns of the Grand Battery readied to open fire again, and the four mighty columns marched to the attack.
The book includes eyewitness accounts, excerpts from memoirs and letters, illustrations and maps.
“Well, thank God, I don’t know what it is to lose a battle, but certainly nothing can be more painful than to gain one with the loss of so many of one’s friends.”
-Duke of Wellington
Beginning with Napoléon’s escape from Elba and his return to France, the book chronicles the events of the decisive battle of Waterloo which was fought between the French army and the Anglo-Allied army led by the Duke of Wellington and Marshal Blücher.
"The art of war does not need complicated manoeuvre; the simplest are the best, and common sense is fundamental. From which one might wonder why generals make blunders; it is because they try to be clever. The most difficult thing is to guess the enemy’s plan, to find the truth from all the reports. The rest merely requires common sense; it is like a boxing match, the more you punch the better it is."
-Napoléon
The book ends by France’s defeat and Napoléon’s exile to St. Helena.
Then they were ready. The drums began again, beating the pas de charge, the Eagles flew bright above the tricolour flags, the guns of the Grand Battery readied to open fire again, and the four mighty columns marched to the attack.
The book includes eyewitness accounts, excerpts from memoirs and letters, illustrations and maps.
“Well, thank God, I don’t know what it is to lose a battle, but certainly nothing can be more painful than to gain one with the loss of so many of one’s friends.”
-Duke of Wellington
April 1, 2020
I was loaned this book a month or so back, by a colleague who knows that I like reading about history.
I’ve actually been to the site of Waterloo. Many years ago I caught a train from Brussels to Braine l’Alleud and walked to the site from there. That was over 30 years ago though, so I don’t recall that much of my visit. I would have also gotten more out of it if I’d read a book like this beforehand.
With an author like Bernard Cornwell, you know you are guaranteed a great story, even when he writes non-fiction, and a great story is exactly what he delivers. The book was captivating, and I finished the whole thing in just a few days. The description of the charge of the British heavy cavalry on Count d’Erlon’s corps was as memorable as anything I’ve read, as was the description of the last attack by Napoleon’s Imperial Guard. Cornwell makes extensive use of first hand accounts and some of these are superbly eloquent in describing the emotions of that day. For those who were at Waterloo and survived, the experience was the most intense of their lives, something that set them apart from others.
The author comes to clear conclusions about the various commanders that day. Napoleon seems to have played a surprisingly passive role, largely leaving Ney to handle the battle. I was left wondering whether Napoleon saw his role as strategic rather than tactical, although that’s not the image generally projected of him. Cornwell is quite critical of Ney’s tactics, both at Waterloo and the earlier clash at Quatre Bras. By contrast Wellington is portrayed as competent, but as someone who found it difficult to delegate. Cornwell is most impressed by the Prussian commander Blücher, who he describes as “a splendid man” although is he critical of Blücher’s Chief of Staff, Gneisenau, viewing him as an Anglophobe whose unwillingness to cooperate with the British could have wrecked the alliance.
I like an author who is clear about their conclusions, but I suppose I would want to read another book about Waterloo before accepting those of a particular author. I’ve learned over the years not set too much store by a single account. This is a great read though, and the hardback edition I read is superbly illustrated.
I’ve actually been to the site of Waterloo. Many years ago I caught a train from Brussels to Braine l’Alleud and walked to the site from there. That was over 30 years ago though, so I don’t recall that much of my visit. I would have also gotten more out of it if I’d read a book like this beforehand.
With an author like Bernard Cornwell, you know you are guaranteed a great story, even when he writes non-fiction, and a great story is exactly what he delivers. The book was captivating, and I finished the whole thing in just a few days. The description of the charge of the British heavy cavalry on Count d’Erlon’s corps was as memorable as anything I’ve read, as was the description of the last attack by Napoleon’s Imperial Guard. Cornwell makes extensive use of first hand accounts and some of these are superbly eloquent in describing the emotions of that day. For those who were at Waterloo and survived, the experience was the most intense of their lives, something that set them apart from others.
The author comes to clear conclusions about the various commanders that day. Napoleon seems to have played a surprisingly passive role, largely leaving Ney to handle the battle. I was left wondering whether Napoleon saw his role as strategic rather than tactical, although that’s not the image generally projected of him. Cornwell is quite critical of Ney’s tactics, both at Waterloo and the earlier clash at Quatre Bras. By contrast Wellington is portrayed as competent, but as someone who found it difficult to delegate. Cornwell is most impressed by the Prussian commander Blücher, who he describes as “a splendid man” although is he critical of Blücher’s Chief of Staff, Gneisenau, viewing him as an Anglophobe whose unwillingness to cooperate with the British could have wrecked the alliance.
I like an author who is clear about their conclusions, but I suppose I would want to read another book about Waterloo before accepting those of a particular author. I’ve learned over the years not set too much store by a single account. This is a great read though, and the hardback edition I read is superbly illustrated.
February 22, 2015
An engaging and well paced book that has the hallmarks of Mr Cornwell's ability to construct stories against one of Europe's most famed and important battles.
In essence this is a book only about the battle: the armies and the three battles over the four days. The background and lead-in is brief but enough for most readers who then are taken into the camps of the three armies and their movements as they build into clash of armies.
For the seasoned Waterloo student or Napoleonic expert Mr Cornwell's book probably adds little new. However, for readers such as myself who have only dipped in lightly this is a good starter s events, characters and outcomes are all placed and described well. I would also suggest for those who perhaps have little understanding or experience of military formations it is also easy to get to grips with as Mr Cornwell recognises not every reader will be a "Sharpe" aficionado or military buff.
Finally, the publisher must also take great credit*. The colour prints, almost all of paintings of the commanders, men and battles, as of superb quality. This provides excellent visual material throughout at the end/start of each chapter but also allows one to then review scenes and passages the author has just delivered.
In short then, if you are looking for a balanced, informative and easy to read one-volume account of this most notable of battles you will do well to start with Mr Cornwell's account.
*My copy was the first edition hard back.
In essence this is a book only about the battle: the armies and the three battles over the four days. The background and lead-in is brief but enough for most readers who then are taken into the camps of the three armies and their movements as they build into clash of armies.
For the seasoned Waterloo student or Napoleonic expert Mr Cornwell's book probably adds little new. However, for readers such as myself who have only dipped in lightly this is a good starter s events, characters and outcomes are all placed and described well. I would also suggest for those who perhaps have little understanding or experience of military formations it is also easy to get to grips with as Mr Cornwell recognises not every reader will be a "Sharpe" aficionado or military buff.
Finally, the publisher must also take great credit*. The colour prints, almost all of paintings of the commanders, men and battles, as of superb quality. This provides excellent visual material throughout at the end/start of each chapter but also allows one to then review scenes and passages the author has just delivered.
In short then, if you are looking for a balanced, informative and easy to read one-volume account of this most notable of battles you will do well to start with Mr Cornwell's account.
*My copy was the first edition hard back.
August 26, 2017
With his first nonfiction book, novelist Bernard Cornwell has done an admirable job of telling the story of the Napoleon’s ultimate defeat. While breaking no new ground, the author does an excellent job of telling the story of the campaign, including the battles of Quatre Bras and Ligny that were fought immediately prior to Waterloo.
In telling of the battle of Quatre Bras, Mr. Cornwell does a good job of telling why Quatre Bas was important and why Wellington decided to defend it. It was a cross road that allowed quick communication between Wellington and Blucher. He illuminates the mistakes the Napoleon and his field commander Marshal Ney made that allowed Wellington to successfully withdraw his forces to their positions at Waterloo.
In his telling of Ligny, I think Mr. Cornwell does the weakest job of the three battles. Even then, he does a good job of explaining Napoleon’s mistakes and why his failure to pursue and destroy the defeated Prussian army enabled his subsequent defeat at Waterloo.
In his telling of the battle of Waterloo itself, I thought Mr. Cornwell did an excellent job of explaining the Rock/Paper/Scissors nature of Napoleonic warfare and how that affected the flow of the battle. He also does an excellent job of explaining the tactics and weaknesses of the various formations used by the armies. In addition Mr. Cornwell does a good job of highlighting the different leadership styles of Napoleon and Wellington. Wellington kept on the move and always seemed to be where he was needed to buck up morale and provide the needed decisions and leadership. Napoleon on the other hand stayed in the same spot the entire battle. He also does a good job of expounding on the inadequecies of the Dutch Crown Prince, William of Orange who was Wellington's second in command.
In additon to the various generals, I felt he author did an excellent job of telling the story of common soldiers who made up the armies. He uses the diary accounts of the participants very well and gives good accounts of the main parts of the battle, ie the battles for Hougoumont and La Haye Sainte, the cavalry charges, and the final assault by the Imperial Guard.
Finally, the illustrations are fantastic. There are 4 or 5 pages following each chapter and many are in full color. I feel they are probably the highlight of the book, almost coffee table book quality. All in all I found this a very good one volume look at the battle that can reasonably be said changed history. It certainly ended an era. This was a solid 4 star read for me.
In telling of the battle of Quatre Bras, Mr. Cornwell does a good job of telling why Quatre Bas was important and why Wellington decided to defend it. It was a cross road that allowed quick communication between Wellington and Blucher. He illuminates the mistakes the Napoleon and his field commander Marshal Ney made that allowed Wellington to successfully withdraw his forces to their positions at Waterloo.
In his telling of Ligny, I think Mr. Cornwell does the weakest job of the three battles. Even then, he does a good job of explaining Napoleon’s mistakes and why his failure to pursue and destroy the defeated Prussian army enabled his subsequent defeat at Waterloo.
In his telling of the battle of Waterloo itself, I thought Mr. Cornwell did an excellent job of explaining the Rock/Paper/Scissors nature of Napoleonic warfare and how that affected the flow of the battle. He also does an excellent job of explaining the tactics and weaknesses of the various formations used by the armies. In addition Mr. Cornwell does a good job of highlighting the different leadership styles of Napoleon and Wellington. Wellington kept on the move and always seemed to be where he was needed to buck up morale and provide the needed decisions and leadership. Napoleon on the other hand stayed in the same spot the entire battle. He also does a good job of expounding on the inadequecies of the Dutch Crown Prince, William of Orange who was Wellington's second in command.
In additon to the various generals, I felt he author did an excellent job of telling the story of common soldiers who made up the armies. He uses the diary accounts of the participants very well and gives good accounts of the main parts of the battle, ie the battles for Hougoumont and La Haye Sainte, the cavalry charges, and the final assault by the Imperial Guard.
Finally, the illustrations are fantastic. There are 4 or 5 pages following each chapter and many are in full color. I feel they are probably the highlight of the book, almost coffee table book quality. All in all I found this a very good one volume look at the battle that can reasonably be said changed history. It certainly ended an era. This was a solid 4 star read for me.
February 2, 2019
This is the second book of basically the same title written by Bernard Cornwell. The first is #20 in the Richard Sharpe series. Cornwell is one of the most respected writers of historical fiction. But here, he is a true historian looking at this pivotal battle in European history.
Unlike many of the Napoleonic Era battles, Waterloo was basically a hastily constructed battle between Napoleon Bonaparte (who desperately needed to his return to the French throne). And, the Allies, led by the Duke of Wellington and the Prussian Prince Blucher, who could not let Napoleon clear Europe of the only forces that could hold him in check.
Albeit an extemporaneous battle, Waterloo, was a massive encounter using the three elements of that era’s military: cavalry, artillery, and infantry. In a world where millions can be killed by a single bomb, it is hard to put the battle losses in proper perspective. About 50,000 soldiers were killed or wounded and the majority of these were in close fighting. This was about 25% of all those engaged in the battle.
Cornwell is a master of the battle’s details and he is meticulous in responding to the previous military historians who have offered their opinions. His take is not a unique one, but he marshals many facts in support of it. Wellington is not an altogether sympathetic leader. His connection with his troops was not an intimate one, but it is one where his example was sufficient to inspire his troops to follow him anywhere. There has been much criticism of Napoleon and an equal amount of rationalization. Cornwell does as good a job as I have seen in winnowing the wheat from the chaff. The same may be said of the wide variety of historian opinion about the Prussians under Blucher.
This is a book for the true battle nerd. I am not sure I rise to that level. Yet, I wish I had read the book before actually touring the battlefield. On the other hand, I enthusiastically recommend Cornwell’s Sharpe’s Waterloo (#20), a novel that captures the historical elements and weaves them into an exciting narrative.
Unlike many of the Napoleonic Era battles, Waterloo was basically a hastily constructed battle between Napoleon Bonaparte (who desperately needed to his return to the French throne). And, the Allies, led by the Duke of Wellington and the Prussian Prince Blucher, who could not let Napoleon clear Europe of the only forces that could hold him in check.
Albeit an extemporaneous battle, Waterloo, was a massive encounter using the three elements of that era’s military: cavalry, artillery, and infantry. In a world where millions can be killed by a single bomb, it is hard to put the battle losses in proper perspective. About 50,000 soldiers were killed or wounded and the majority of these were in close fighting. This was about 25% of all those engaged in the battle.
Cornwell is a master of the battle’s details and he is meticulous in responding to the previous military historians who have offered their opinions. His take is not a unique one, but he marshals many facts in support of it. Wellington is not an altogether sympathetic leader. His connection with his troops was not an intimate one, but it is one where his example was sufficient to inspire his troops to follow him anywhere. There has been much criticism of Napoleon and an equal amount of rationalization. Cornwell does as good a job as I have seen in winnowing the wheat from the chaff. The same may be said of the wide variety of historian opinion about the Prussians under Blucher.
This is a book for the true battle nerd. I am not sure I rise to that level. Yet, I wish I had read the book before actually touring the battlefield. On the other hand, I enthusiastically recommend Cornwell’s Sharpe’s Waterloo (#20), a novel that captures the historical elements and weaves them into an exciting narrative.
May 27, 2018
For a non-fiction title, this was a riveting and moving read that was not only not dry, but actually managed to transport me like fiction to that shudderingly brutal time and place. As much as there are various military terms and jargon that were confusing to me (not surprisingly), that didn’t take away the enthralling effect the book had on me.
Cornwell’s lucid description of the terrain of the battlefield at the beginning gives a presentiment of what might later prove to be obstructive or facilitating to the British/Dutch army and the Prussian and French armies. The actual battles were fought from July 15 (Thursday) to July 18 (Sunday), 1815, and the minute details of the armies’ strategies and engagements are mostly told from vivid eyewitness accounts, interwoven with the author’s own views of “what-ifs”.
One interesting observation the author makes is the similarity of natural circumstance between the Battle of Azincourt (1415) and the Battle of Waterloo (1815), that is, the rainy weather that turns the battlefield into a big muddy quagmire in both cases. Also, as noted by the author, in both of these fate-changing battles for France and England, the French Army’s outnumbering their enemy is of no help to the former, implying superhuman valiance of the latter. I happened to have earlier read Cornwell’s Azincourt, and understood what he meant. But I was well aware of the fact that history is written by the victor.
Reading this book reminds me once again how little men had learned from history, and how men had always tragically chosen animalistic violence over compromise and mediation in cases of disputes, repeating their ancestors’ mistakes over and over again.
Cornwell’s lucid description of the terrain of the battlefield at the beginning gives a presentiment of what might later prove to be obstructive or facilitating to the British/Dutch army and the Prussian and French armies. The actual battles were fought from July 15 (Thursday) to July 18 (Sunday), 1815, and the minute details of the armies’ strategies and engagements are mostly told from vivid eyewitness accounts, interwoven with the author’s own views of “what-ifs”.
One interesting observation the author makes is the similarity of natural circumstance between the Battle of Azincourt (1415) and the Battle of Waterloo (1815), that is, the rainy weather that turns the battlefield into a big muddy quagmire in both cases. Also, as noted by the author, in both of these fate-changing battles for France and England, the French Army’s outnumbering their enemy is of no help to the former, implying superhuman valiance of the latter. I happened to have earlier read Cornwell’s Azincourt, and understood what he meant. But I was well aware of the fact that history is written by the victor.
Reading this book reminds me once again how little men had learned from history, and how men had always tragically chosen animalistic violence over compromise and mediation in cases of disputes, repeating their ancestors’ mistakes over and over again.
October 22, 2023
Fresh Insights and Old Excitements.
The author of the famous Sharpe series, Bernard Cornwell turns his hand at writing fiction into fact, with his history of the Battle of Waterloo. For me, this was an excellent book, which focuses on all four days of the campaign and is a great introduction to the battle for newcomers and has some fresh insights to offer for those who had trodden this ground previously. Drawing on nearly thirty years of research Cornwell, with a talent for writing, is the person to write a history of this battle. He admits that it is complicated, confusing, nearly 300,000 men were involved, and those who survived each with different memories of the events. But as always dedicated to his craft and a love of accuracy he pieces the story together.
Cornwell gets straight to it, he is clear on why Napoleon lost the battle, because of his two direct subordinates, Marshal Michel Ney and Marshal Emmanuel de Grouchy. Cornwell suggests that Ney may have been suffering from some form of post traumatic stress disorder after the catastrophe of 1812. The retreat from Moscow put men through unimaginable suffering and stress. Ney himself was very nearly captured and was lucky to get out. The effects were still lingering three years later where as Cornwell shows he made two huge errors. The bravest of the brave was too cautious in attacking the British at Quatre Bras and too reckless with the cavalry at Waterloo. Grouchy had famously been criticised for his poor performance and many believe he would never had made marshal status in the zenith of Napoleon’s epoch. Cornwell does give some slack for his failure to locate the retreating Prussians after Quatre Bras and he makes at point that in a world with radios or GPS and with horrendous rain, no one really had their bearings. But his failure on the 18/06/1815 to march to the sound of the cannons of the battlefield, for Cornwell is an unforgivable mistake.
Napoleon has to always be accountable for two decisions prior to the battle, which had fatal consequences. Leaving his greatest and most talented Marshal, Louis-Nicholas Davout in charge of civil defence in Paris and alienating his flamboyant but very talented cavalry commander Joachim Murat, who played no part at all. Had these two been present, Wellingtons famous victory could easily have been his first defeat. But many know, Napoleon’s time was running out and by this time the allies no longer excepted him as a viable leader of France. The European powers did not want a military man, or someone else susceptible to Jacobin will, they wanted legitimacy and that’s why they chose the Bourbons. Russia and Austria would mobilise to fight and Napoleon simply didn’t have enough men or resources. If not Waterloo then it would have been some other place soon after.
It is curious to know that Cornwell stands with the old adage that General Cambronne did indeed shout ‘merde’, the French for ‘crap’ in defiance to surrender to Rowland Hill. I have read differing accounts over whether this happened or not. I imagine something like this did occur before the last line of French resistance was blown away by cannon and the Napoleonic era finally ended. Cornwell also ends his book with some analysis of the battle. Who won? Who lost? How many died? But most significantly, why this battle is important and why it should continue to be read about today. A great book on a defining point in history.
The author of the famous Sharpe series, Bernard Cornwell turns his hand at writing fiction into fact, with his history of the Battle of Waterloo. For me, this was an excellent book, which focuses on all four days of the campaign and is a great introduction to the battle for newcomers and has some fresh insights to offer for those who had trodden this ground previously. Drawing on nearly thirty years of research Cornwell, with a talent for writing, is the person to write a history of this battle. He admits that it is complicated, confusing, nearly 300,000 men were involved, and those who survived each with different memories of the events. But as always dedicated to his craft and a love of accuracy he pieces the story together.
Cornwell gets straight to it, he is clear on why Napoleon lost the battle, because of his two direct subordinates, Marshal Michel Ney and Marshal Emmanuel de Grouchy. Cornwell suggests that Ney may have been suffering from some form of post traumatic stress disorder after the catastrophe of 1812. The retreat from Moscow put men through unimaginable suffering and stress. Ney himself was very nearly captured and was lucky to get out. The effects were still lingering three years later where as Cornwell shows he made two huge errors. The bravest of the brave was too cautious in attacking the British at Quatre Bras and too reckless with the cavalry at Waterloo. Grouchy had famously been criticised for his poor performance and many believe he would never had made marshal status in the zenith of Napoleon’s epoch. Cornwell does give some slack for his failure to locate the retreating Prussians after Quatre Bras and he makes at point that in a world with radios or GPS and with horrendous rain, no one really had their bearings. But his failure on the 18/06/1815 to march to the sound of the cannons of the battlefield, for Cornwell is an unforgivable mistake.
Napoleon has to always be accountable for two decisions prior to the battle, which had fatal consequences. Leaving his greatest and most talented Marshal, Louis-Nicholas Davout in charge of civil defence in Paris and alienating his flamboyant but very talented cavalry commander Joachim Murat, who played no part at all. Had these two been present, Wellingtons famous victory could easily have been his first defeat. But many know, Napoleon’s time was running out and by this time the allies no longer excepted him as a viable leader of France. The European powers did not want a military man, or someone else susceptible to Jacobin will, they wanted legitimacy and that’s why they chose the Bourbons. Russia and Austria would mobilise to fight and Napoleon simply didn’t have enough men or resources. If not Waterloo then it would have been some other place soon after.
It is curious to know that Cornwell stands with the old adage that General Cambronne did indeed shout ‘merde’, the French for ‘crap’ in defiance to surrender to Rowland Hill. I have read differing accounts over whether this happened or not. I imagine something like this did occur before the last line of French resistance was blown away by cannon and the Napoleonic era finally ended. Cornwell also ends his book with some analysis of the battle. Who won? Who lost? How many died? But most significantly, why this battle is important and why it should continue to be read about today. A great book on a defining point in history.
November 24, 2015
Only buy the hardback edition--this is a gloriously handsome book with at least 50 color plates/maps. Don't even think of buying in electronic form.
Such "Saxon Tales" storytelling of a Napoleonic battle isn't for everyone--marred upon occasion by over-dramatic storytelling hardly necessary for the most consequential land battle of the first half of the 19th Century (and perhaps the entire Century). But it is a good basic introduction, with more maps than most modern works provide, and far more color (excuse me, colour) plates -- thirty three, not counting maps -- than similar works. Including this beauty, though Cornwell explains it is inaccurate:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia...
My prior familiarity with Waterloo came in two or three bios of Napoleon. So I'll have to read another to see whether the pattycake approach obscured fact. For me, the key insight was Cornwell's "scissors, paper, stone" analogy ("rock, paper, scissors" in North America) to Napoleonic land warfare: cavalry could attack infantry, whose defense was the square, which was vulnerable to artillery--but to win, the timing of the attack had to be perfect. Napoleon's and Marshal Ney's wasn't.
I have a feeling this book will annoy more knowledgeable readers (and I see Aussie Rick already found a factual error). But a great into, and a wonderful reference for those of us old enough to have bookcases.
"They had expected a swift victory over the ragged armies of Revolutionary France, but instead they sparked a world war which saw both Washington and Moscow burned."
"A few weeks before Waterloo [the Duke of Wellington] was walking in a Brussels park with Thomas Creevey, a British parliamentarian, who rather anxiously asked the Duke about the expected campaign. A red-coated British infantryman was staring at the park's statutes and the Duke pointed at the man. 'There', he said, 'there. It all depends upon that article whether we do the business or not. Give me enough of it, and I am sure."
French officer Captain Pierre Cardon was summoned along with all the infantry regiment. The stood in two ranks "asking each other what was going on? What was there? In the end we were filled with worry. [Then, his Colonel appeared] holding in his hands, what? You would not guess in a hundred years. . . Our eagle, under which we had marched so many times to victory and which the brave Colonel had hidden inside the mattress of his bed. . . At the sight of the cherished standard cries of 'Vive l'Empereur' could be heard; soldiers and officers, all overwhelmed, wanted not only to see, but to embrace and touch it; this incident made every eye flow with tears of emotion… we have promised to die beneath our eagle for the country and Napoleon."
"So Napoleon believed he could shove the Prussians further away, then switch his attack to the British. It was all going to plan and the Emperor would take breakfast in Brussels's Laeken Palace on Saturday morning.
Except Ney had still not captured Quatre-Bras."
"[T]he Emperor, alarmed, delays that attack until he can discover the identity of these newly arrived troops. They are his own men, but in the wrong place, so a messenger rides to d'Erlon ordering him to turn northwards and assault the Prussian flanks, but just then yet another courier arrives, this one from Narshal Ney, demanding that d'Erlon return to Quatre-Bras immediately.
D'Erlon assumes that Ney is in desperate trouble and so he turns his Corps around and sets off a second time for Quatre-Bras. The Emperor has launched his great attack, but by the time he realizes d'Erlon is not engaged, the 1st Corps has vanished. Thus did those 22,000 men spend that Friday, marching between two battlefields and helping at neither. D'Erlon arrived at Quarte-Bras at sundown and his powerful Corps, which could have swung either the battle at Ligny or the fighting at Quatre-Bras, had achieved nothing. It is the French equivalent of the Grand Old Duke of York, except d'Erlon spend his day halfway between two fights, neither up nor down, and his prevarication denied Napoleon the crushing victory he expected."
"[The Duke of Wellington] was not loved as Blücher was, nor worshipped like Napoleon, but he was respected. He could be sharply witty; long after the wars were over, some French officers pointedly turned their backs on him in Paris, for which rudeness a woman apologized. 'Don't worry, Madame,' the Duke said, 'I've seen their backs before.'"
"At Ligny the Emperor had set a trap for Blücher, hoping that Ney or d'Erlon would fall like a thunderbolt on the Prussian right flank. The trap had failed.
Blücher had hoped that Wellington would come to Ligny and so attack the French left flank, but that trap had also failed.
Now a third trap was set. Wellington was the bait, Napoleon the intended victim and Blücher the executioner.
It was dawn on Sunday, 18 June 1815,"
"Macdonell realized that the most important task was not to kill Legros [the French Sous-Lieutenant who axed-open the door to Hougoumont] and his companions, but to close the gate so that no more Frenchmen could enter. He led a small group of men past the intruders and together the forced the big gates shut, they heaved against the pressure from outside, some men shot through the slowly closing gap, and they ignored Legros's men who were fighting behind them. . .
Wellington once remarked that closing the gates [at Hougoumont] was the decisive act of battle and, later, when an eccentric clergyman wanted to arrange an annuity for 'the bravest man at Waterloo' and requested the Duke to make such a difficult judgement, Wellington chose Macdonnell. Macdonnell, in turn, insisted on sharing the money with Sergeant James Graham, an Irishman who had been at his side in those decisive moments, the pair did receive the annuity for two years before the generous clergyman lost his money, but it is significant that Wellington, forced to make a decision, nominated Macdonnell and, by association, Graham."
"Napoleon now faces a dilemma. He has Wellington's army in front of him, but he must have known that a heavy force of Prussians was approaching to his right. He will be greatly outnumbered, yet he still insisted that he had a good chance of winning the battle. 'This morning we had ninety chances of winning,' the Emperor told Soult, 'we still have sixty.'"
"French cavalry threatened, French infantry was on the ridge's crest and Marshal Soult was surely justified in thinking that victory was imminent. Duthilt's men might have been in disorder, but there were more battalions stacked behind his and sheer weight of numbers would push the redcoats back. And those redcoats were in line, and infantry in line was red meat to cavalryman, as the cuirasses had already proved on the Hanoverians whose slaughtered bodies lay thick close to La Haie Sainte. The British battalions would have to form square and, while that would protect them from cavalry, it would make them horribly vulnerable to French infantry volleys. Scissors, paper, stone.
And then the cavalry charged.
Only it was the British cavalry."
"[T]hat was the great disadvantage of the formation the French had chosen to use. A column made of successive battalions in line looked magnificent and, given the chance, might have spread into a formidable line to give devastating volley fire, but it would take a battalion in a three-rank line a lot of time to form square,and they would be hammered by the battalions in front and behind while they did. There was neither space nor time to form square. Major Frederick Clarke, who charged with the Scotland Greys, reckons the enemy was trying to form square, but 'the first and nearest square had not time to complete their formation, and the Greys charged through it.' So the British heavy cavalry drove into the panicking columns and [Louis] Canler tells what happened: ' A real carnage followed. Everyone was separated from his comrades and fought for his own life. Sabres and bayonets slashed at the shaking flesh for we were too close packed to use our firearms.' . . .There was no time to form square, so his unit was cut to ribbons."
"At first Ordener probably thought Ney was doing the right thing because, as his horse breasted the British-Dutch ridge, he saw 'the enemy baggage and massed fugitives hurrying along the road to Brussels,' and he saw abandoned artillery through which the horsemen had passed 'like lightning,' but then he saw something else.
British squares. The British were not running away. Wellington was not disengaging and trying to withdraw his forces. Yes there were men and wagons on the road, but most of the British-Dutch army was still on the ridge and they were ready to fight. . . So it was horsemen against Infantry, and every cavalryman must have known what Captain Duthilt had written, that 'it is difficult, if not impossible, for the best cavalry to break infantry who are formed in squares', so while at first the cavalrymen seemed to have pierced the British-Dutch line, instead they were faced with the worst obstacle a horseman could encounter. The wide plateau of the ridge top was packed with squares, at least twenty of them, in a rough chequer pattern so that if a horseman rode safely past one square he was immediately faced with another, and then encountered more beyond. And each square bristled with bayonets and spat musket fire."
"'The best of all France possesses,' General Foy said, watching in amazement as the cavalry rode again and again to its doom. 'I saw their golden breastplates,' a French infantry officer said of the curassiers, 'they passed me by and I saw them no more.'"
"Marshal Ney's cavalry assault had been brave and hopeless, hurling horses and men against immovable squares.
Those squares could have been broken by artillery if Ney had managed to bring more guns close to the line, or he could have destroyed them with infantry. That was the scissors, paper and stone reality of Napoleonic warfare. If you could force an enemy to form a square you could bring a line of infantry against it and overwhelm it with musket fire, and very late in the afternoon Marshal Ney at last tried that tactic, ordering 8,000 infantry to attack the British squares. . . Their task was to deploy into line and then smother the British squares with musketry, but the British would only be in square if the cavalry threatened and the French cavalry was exhausted. They had charged again and again, they had shown extraordinary courage and too many of them were now dead on the hillside. There was no charge left in them."
"British infantry firepower had again shown its effectiveness and again the line had overcome the column. Eight thousand men had been defeated in seconds, blasted off the ridge by concentrated musket volleys and shredded by canister. The survivors fled down that terrible slope that was slick with blood, thick with dead and dying horses, and with dead and wounded men. It was littered with breastplates discarded by unhorsed cuirassiers running for their lives, and with scabbards because many of the French cavalry had pointedly thrown away their sword scabbards to show that they would not sheathe their blades until they had victory."
"Meanwhile, a furious argument was raging between Lieutenant Colonel von Reiche, one of von Zieten's staff officers, and Captain von Schnarhorst. Von Reiche wanted to obey the original orders and go to Wellington's assistance, despite the report of the Duke's defeat, but von Schnarhorst insisted that Blücher's new orders [to turn south and join the main Prussian body] must be obeyed. 'I pointed out to him', von Reiche said: ' that everything had been arranged with von Müffling, that Wellington counted on our arrival close to him, but von Schnarhorst did not want to listen to anything. He declared that I would be held responsible if I disobeyed Blücher's orders.'. . . The troops had paused while this argument had raged, but then General Steinmetz, who commanded the advance guard of von Zieten's column came galloping up, angry at the delay, and brusquely told von Reiche that Blücher's new orders would be obeyed. The column dutifully continued marching eastward, looking for a smaller lane that led south towards Plancenoit, but just then von Zieten himself appeared and the argument started all over again. Von Zieten listened and then took a brave decision. He would ignore Blücher's new orders and, believing von Müffling's assurance that the Duke was not in full retreat, he ordered his troops onto the British-Dutch ridge. The Prussian 1st Corps would join Wellington after all."
"The Imperial Guard was trying to deploy into line, but once again, as had happened so many times in the Peninsula, they had left it too late. The Brigade of Guards outnumbered and overlapped them, the musket balls were coming in front and from the sides, and when they tried to spread into a line they were beaten back by those steady, relentless volleys. . . Raw, badly trained troops oft n opened fire at far too long a range and then had a tendency to shoot high, but not the Brigade of Guards. They were shooting at a range where a musket could hardly miss, and their enemy, if he wanted to reload, had to halt, and then the ranks behind pushed him on, and so the Chasseurs fell into confusion and still those relentless volleys struck them and more men died. They were obstructed now by their own dead and wounded, and the Bregade of Guards was still firing until Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander, Lord Saltoun, shouted them forward. . . 'Now's the time, my boys!', he shouted, and the Guarde leveled bayonets and charged. 'At that moment, Captain Reeve', another Peninsular veteran recalled, 'we charged them, they went to the right about and fled in all directions.'"
"[Lieutenant Colonel Sir John Colborne] took the 52nd out of line. Half Colborne's men were Peninsula veterans, and they knew their business. Sir John marched his battalion forward, then wheeled it round so that his men faced the left flank of the Guard Chasseurs. . . They began firing volleys into the French flank so that the Imperial Guardsman were being attacked from their front and from their left. It was merciless. The Unbeaten were being killed by the Unbeatable. . . They did not just retreat, they broke. They had been beaten by British volleys and they fled that terrible musketry and when they fled so did the rest of the guard.
And when they broke, so did the hopes of France."
"Wellington rode back towards the centre of his line. Leeks had seen him just before the 52nd marched out of line to destroy and Emperor's dreams. The Duke's clothes, Leeke said, 'consisted of a blue sur tout coat, white kerseymere pantaloons, and Hessian boots. He wore a sword with a waist belt, but no sash.' The plain blue coat and black cocked hat made Wellington instantly recognizable to his men, and now, as the French began to flee, he watched from the ridge's centre fro a few moments. He saw an enemy in panic, a retreating enemy that was dissolving into chaos. He watched them, then was heard to mutter, 'In for a penny, in for a pound'. He took off his cocked hat and men say that just then a slanting ray of evening sunlight came through the clouds to illuminate him on the ridge he had defended all day. He waved the hat towards the enemy. He waved it three times, and it was a signal for the whole allied army to advance."
"[It was about 10pm on June 21, in London when socialite Mrs Boehm 'walked up to the Prince, and asked whether it was his Royal Highness's pleasure that the ball should open. The first quadrille was in the act of forming, and the Prince was walking up to the dias on which his seat was placed, when I saw everyone without the slightest sense of decorum fishing to the windows, which had been left wide open because of the excessive sultriness of the weather. The music ceased and the dance was stopped; for we heard nothing but the vociferous shouts of an enormous mob, who had just entered the square, and were rushing by the side ota post-chaise and four, out of whose windows were hanging three nasty French eagles. In a second the door of the carriage was flung open, and, without waiting for the steps to be let down, out sprung Henry Percy -- such a dirty figure! with a flag in each hand, pushing aside every one who happened to be in his way, darting up stairs, into the ball-room, stepping hastily up to the Regent, dropping on to one knee, laying the flags at his feet, and pronouncing the words "Victory, Sir! Victory!" . . .
Of course, one was glad to think one had beaten those horrid French, and all that sort of thing; but still, I shall always think it would have been far better if Henry Percy had waited quietly till the morning, instead of bursting in upon us, as he did, in such indecent haste.'"
"The battle of Waterloo was an allied victory. That was how it was planned and that was how it turned out. Wellington would never have made his stand if he thought for one moment that the Prussians would let him down. Blücher would never have marched if he thought Wellington would cut and run. It is true that the Prussians arrived later than Wellington hoped, but that probably contributed to the battle's success. If Blücher's forces had arrived two or three hours earlier then Napoleon might have disengaged his army and retreated, but by the time that the Prussians intervened the French army was almost wholly committed to the fight and disengagement was impossible. The Emperor was not just defeated, he was routed."
"An easier question to answer than 'who won the battle?' Is 'who lost the battle?', and the answer must be Napoleon. The Duke and Blücher both offered leadership, but Napoleon left the conduct of the battle to Marshal Ney, who, though braver than most men, did little more than hurl troops against the most skillful defensive general of the age. The French had the time and the men to break Wellington's line, but they failed, partly because the Duke defended so cleverly, and partly because the French never coordinated and all-arms assault on the allied line. They delayed the start of the battle on a day when Wellington was praying for time. They wasted men in a time-consuming assault that lasted much of the afternoon. And why Napoleon entrusted the battle's conduct to Ney is a mystery; Ney was certainly brave, but the Emperor damned him as 'too stupid to be able to succeed', so why rely on him? And, when the French did achieve their one great success, the capture of La Haie Sainte, which enabled them to occupy the forward slope of Wellington's ridge, the Emperor refused to reinforce the centre and so gave the Duke time to bring up his own reinforcements. Finally, when the Imperial Guard did attack, it was too few and too late, and by that time, the Prussians were on the French flank and threatening their rear."
Such "Saxon Tales" storytelling of a Napoleonic battle isn't for everyone--marred upon occasion by over-dramatic storytelling hardly necessary for the most consequential land battle of the first half of the 19th Century (and perhaps the entire Century). But it is a good basic introduction, with more maps than most modern works provide, and far more color (excuse me, colour) plates -- thirty three, not counting maps -- than similar works. Including this beauty, though Cornwell explains it is inaccurate:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia...
My prior familiarity with Waterloo came in two or three bios of Napoleon. So I'll have to read another to see whether the pattycake approach obscured fact. For me, the key insight was Cornwell's "scissors, paper, stone" analogy ("rock, paper, scissors" in North America) to Napoleonic land warfare: cavalry could attack infantry, whose defense was the square, which was vulnerable to artillery--but to win, the timing of the attack had to be perfect. Napoleon's and Marshal Ney's wasn't.
I have a feeling this book will annoy more knowledgeable readers (and I see Aussie Rick already found a factual error). But a great into, and a wonderful reference for those of us old enough to have bookcases.
"They had expected a swift victory over the ragged armies of Revolutionary France, but instead they sparked a world war which saw both Washington and Moscow burned."
"A few weeks before Waterloo [the Duke of Wellington] was walking in a Brussels park with Thomas Creevey, a British parliamentarian, who rather anxiously asked the Duke about the expected campaign. A red-coated British infantryman was staring at the park's statutes and the Duke pointed at the man. 'There', he said, 'there. It all depends upon that article whether we do the business or not. Give me enough of it, and I am sure."
French officer Captain Pierre Cardon was summoned along with all the infantry regiment. The stood in two ranks "asking each other what was going on? What was there? In the end we were filled with worry. [Then, his Colonel appeared] holding in his hands, what? You would not guess in a hundred years. . . Our eagle, under which we had marched so many times to victory and which the brave Colonel had hidden inside the mattress of his bed. . . At the sight of the cherished standard cries of 'Vive l'Empereur' could be heard; soldiers and officers, all overwhelmed, wanted not only to see, but to embrace and touch it; this incident made every eye flow with tears of emotion… we have promised to die beneath our eagle for the country and Napoleon."
"So Napoleon believed he could shove the Prussians further away, then switch his attack to the British. It was all going to plan and the Emperor would take breakfast in Brussels's Laeken Palace on Saturday morning.
Except Ney had still not captured Quatre-Bras."
"[T]he Emperor, alarmed, delays that attack until he can discover the identity of these newly arrived troops. They are his own men, but in the wrong place, so a messenger rides to d'Erlon ordering him to turn northwards and assault the Prussian flanks, but just then yet another courier arrives, this one from Narshal Ney, demanding that d'Erlon return to Quatre-Bras immediately.
D'Erlon assumes that Ney is in desperate trouble and so he turns his Corps around and sets off a second time for Quatre-Bras. The Emperor has launched his great attack, but by the time he realizes d'Erlon is not engaged, the 1st Corps has vanished. Thus did those 22,000 men spend that Friday, marching between two battlefields and helping at neither. D'Erlon arrived at Quarte-Bras at sundown and his powerful Corps, which could have swung either the battle at Ligny or the fighting at Quatre-Bras, had achieved nothing. It is the French equivalent of the Grand Old Duke of York, except d'Erlon spend his day halfway between two fights, neither up nor down, and his prevarication denied Napoleon the crushing victory he expected."
"[The Duke of Wellington] was not loved as Blücher was, nor worshipped like Napoleon, but he was respected. He could be sharply witty; long after the wars were over, some French officers pointedly turned their backs on him in Paris, for which rudeness a woman apologized. 'Don't worry, Madame,' the Duke said, 'I've seen their backs before.'"
"At Ligny the Emperor had set a trap for Blücher, hoping that Ney or d'Erlon would fall like a thunderbolt on the Prussian right flank. The trap had failed.
Blücher had hoped that Wellington would come to Ligny and so attack the French left flank, but that trap had also failed.
Now a third trap was set. Wellington was the bait, Napoleon the intended victim and Blücher the executioner.
It was dawn on Sunday, 18 June 1815,"
"Macdonell realized that the most important task was not to kill Legros [the French Sous-Lieutenant who axed-open the door to Hougoumont] and his companions, but to close the gate so that no more Frenchmen could enter. He led a small group of men past the intruders and together the forced the big gates shut, they heaved against the pressure from outside, some men shot through the slowly closing gap, and they ignored Legros's men who were fighting behind them. . .
Wellington once remarked that closing the gates [at Hougoumont] was the decisive act of battle and, later, when an eccentric clergyman wanted to arrange an annuity for 'the bravest man at Waterloo' and requested the Duke to make such a difficult judgement, Wellington chose Macdonnell. Macdonnell, in turn, insisted on sharing the money with Sergeant James Graham, an Irishman who had been at his side in those decisive moments, the pair did receive the annuity for two years before the generous clergyman lost his money, but it is significant that Wellington, forced to make a decision, nominated Macdonnell and, by association, Graham."
"Napoleon now faces a dilemma. He has Wellington's army in front of him, but he must have known that a heavy force of Prussians was approaching to his right. He will be greatly outnumbered, yet he still insisted that he had a good chance of winning the battle. 'This morning we had ninety chances of winning,' the Emperor told Soult, 'we still have sixty.'"
"French cavalry threatened, French infantry was on the ridge's crest and Marshal Soult was surely justified in thinking that victory was imminent. Duthilt's men might have been in disorder, but there were more battalions stacked behind his and sheer weight of numbers would push the redcoats back. And those redcoats were in line, and infantry in line was red meat to cavalryman, as the cuirasses had already proved on the Hanoverians whose slaughtered bodies lay thick close to La Haie Sainte. The British battalions would have to form square and, while that would protect them from cavalry, it would make them horribly vulnerable to French infantry volleys. Scissors, paper, stone.
And then the cavalry charged.
Only it was the British cavalry."
"[T]hat was the great disadvantage of the formation the French had chosen to use. A column made of successive battalions in line looked magnificent and, given the chance, might have spread into a formidable line to give devastating volley fire, but it would take a battalion in a three-rank line a lot of time to form square,and they would be hammered by the battalions in front and behind while they did. There was neither space nor time to form square. Major Frederick Clarke, who charged with the Scotland Greys, reckons the enemy was trying to form square, but 'the first and nearest square had not time to complete their formation, and the Greys charged through it.' So the British heavy cavalry drove into the panicking columns and [Louis] Canler tells what happened: ' A real carnage followed. Everyone was separated from his comrades and fought for his own life. Sabres and bayonets slashed at the shaking flesh for we were too close packed to use our firearms.' . . .There was no time to form square, so his unit was cut to ribbons."
"At first Ordener probably thought Ney was doing the right thing because, as his horse breasted the British-Dutch ridge, he saw 'the enemy baggage and massed fugitives hurrying along the road to Brussels,' and he saw abandoned artillery through which the horsemen had passed 'like lightning,' but then he saw something else.
British squares. The British were not running away. Wellington was not disengaging and trying to withdraw his forces. Yes there were men and wagons on the road, but most of the British-Dutch army was still on the ridge and they were ready to fight. . . So it was horsemen against Infantry, and every cavalryman must have known what Captain Duthilt had written, that 'it is difficult, if not impossible, for the best cavalry to break infantry who are formed in squares', so while at first the cavalrymen seemed to have pierced the British-Dutch line, instead they were faced with the worst obstacle a horseman could encounter. The wide plateau of the ridge top was packed with squares, at least twenty of them, in a rough chequer pattern so that if a horseman rode safely past one square he was immediately faced with another, and then encountered more beyond. And each square bristled with bayonets and spat musket fire."
"'The best of all France possesses,' General Foy said, watching in amazement as the cavalry rode again and again to its doom. 'I saw their golden breastplates,' a French infantry officer said of the curassiers, 'they passed me by and I saw them no more.'"
"Marshal Ney's cavalry assault had been brave and hopeless, hurling horses and men against immovable squares.
Those squares could have been broken by artillery if Ney had managed to bring more guns close to the line, or he could have destroyed them with infantry. That was the scissors, paper and stone reality of Napoleonic warfare. If you could force an enemy to form a square you could bring a line of infantry against it and overwhelm it with musket fire, and very late in the afternoon Marshal Ney at last tried that tactic, ordering 8,000 infantry to attack the British squares. . . Their task was to deploy into line and then smother the British squares with musketry, but the British would only be in square if the cavalry threatened and the French cavalry was exhausted. They had charged again and again, they had shown extraordinary courage and too many of them were now dead on the hillside. There was no charge left in them."
"British infantry firepower had again shown its effectiveness and again the line had overcome the column. Eight thousand men had been defeated in seconds, blasted off the ridge by concentrated musket volleys and shredded by canister. The survivors fled down that terrible slope that was slick with blood, thick with dead and dying horses, and with dead and wounded men. It was littered with breastplates discarded by unhorsed cuirassiers running for their lives, and with scabbards because many of the French cavalry had pointedly thrown away their sword scabbards to show that they would not sheathe their blades until they had victory."
"Meanwhile, a furious argument was raging between Lieutenant Colonel von Reiche, one of von Zieten's staff officers, and Captain von Schnarhorst. Von Reiche wanted to obey the original orders and go to Wellington's assistance, despite the report of the Duke's defeat, but von Schnarhorst insisted that Blücher's new orders [to turn south and join the main Prussian body] must be obeyed. 'I pointed out to him', von Reiche said: ' that everything had been arranged with von Müffling, that Wellington counted on our arrival close to him, but von Schnarhorst did not want to listen to anything. He declared that I would be held responsible if I disobeyed Blücher's orders.'. . . The troops had paused while this argument had raged, but then General Steinmetz, who commanded the advance guard of von Zieten's column came galloping up, angry at the delay, and brusquely told von Reiche that Blücher's new orders would be obeyed. The column dutifully continued marching eastward, looking for a smaller lane that led south towards Plancenoit, but just then von Zieten himself appeared and the argument started all over again. Von Zieten listened and then took a brave decision. He would ignore Blücher's new orders and, believing von Müffling's assurance that the Duke was not in full retreat, he ordered his troops onto the British-Dutch ridge. The Prussian 1st Corps would join Wellington after all."
"The Imperial Guard was trying to deploy into line, but once again, as had happened so many times in the Peninsula, they had left it too late. The Brigade of Guards outnumbered and overlapped them, the musket balls were coming in front and from the sides, and when they tried to spread into a line they were beaten back by those steady, relentless volleys. . . Raw, badly trained troops oft n opened fire at far too long a range and then had a tendency to shoot high, but not the Brigade of Guards. They were shooting at a range where a musket could hardly miss, and their enemy, if he wanted to reload, had to halt, and then the ranks behind pushed him on, and so the Chasseurs fell into confusion and still those relentless volleys struck them and more men died. They were obstructed now by their own dead and wounded, and the Bregade of Guards was still firing until Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander, Lord Saltoun, shouted them forward. . . 'Now's the time, my boys!', he shouted, and the Guarde leveled bayonets and charged. 'At that moment, Captain Reeve', another Peninsular veteran recalled, 'we charged them, they went to the right about and fled in all directions.'"
"[Lieutenant Colonel Sir John Colborne] took the 52nd out of line. Half Colborne's men were Peninsula veterans, and they knew their business. Sir John marched his battalion forward, then wheeled it round so that his men faced the left flank of the Guard Chasseurs. . . They began firing volleys into the French flank so that the Imperial Guardsman were being attacked from their front and from their left. It was merciless. The Unbeaten were being killed by the Unbeatable. . . They did not just retreat, they broke. They had been beaten by British volleys and they fled that terrible musketry and when they fled so did the rest of the guard.
And when they broke, so did the hopes of France."
"Wellington rode back towards the centre of his line. Leeks had seen him just before the 52nd marched out of line to destroy and Emperor's dreams. The Duke's clothes, Leeke said, 'consisted of a blue sur tout coat, white kerseymere pantaloons, and Hessian boots. He wore a sword with a waist belt, but no sash.' The plain blue coat and black cocked hat made Wellington instantly recognizable to his men, and now, as the French began to flee, he watched from the ridge's centre fro a few moments. He saw an enemy in panic, a retreating enemy that was dissolving into chaos. He watched them, then was heard to mutter, 'In for a penny, in for a pound'. He took off his cocked hat and men say that just then a slanting ray of evening sunlight came through the clouds to illuminate him on the ridge he had defended all day. He waved the hat towards the enemy. He waved it three times, and it was a signal for the whole allied army to advance."
"[It was about 10pm on June 21, in London when socialite Mrs Boehm 'walked up to the Prince, and asked whether it was his Royal Highness's pleasure that the ball should open. The first quadrille was in the act of forming, and the Prince was walking up to the dias on which his seat was placed, when I saw everyone without the slightest sense of decorum fishing to the windows, which had been left wide open because of the excessive sultriness of the weather. The music ceased and the dance was stopped; for we heard nothing but the vociferous shouts of an enormous mob, who had just entered the square, and were rushing by the side ota post-chaise and four, out of whose windows were hanging three nasty French eagles. In a second the door of the carriage was flung open, and, without waiting for the steps to be let down, out sprung Henry Percy -- such a dirty figure! with a flag in each hand, pushing aside every one who happened to be in his way, darting up stairs, into the ball-room, stepping hastily up to the Regent, dropping on to one knee, laying the flags at his feet, and pronouncing the words "Victory, Sir! Victory!" . . .
Of course, one was glad to think one had beaten those horrid French, and all that sort of thing; but still, I shall always think it would have been far better if Henry Percy had waited quietly till the morning, instead of bursting in upon us, as he did, in such indecent haste.'"
"The battle of Waterloo was an allied victory. That was how it was planned and that was how it turned out. Wellington would never have made his stand if he thought for one moment that the Prussians would let him down. Blücher would never have marched if he thought Wellington would cut and run. It is true that the Prussians arrived later than Wellington hoped, but that probably contributed to the battle's success. If Blücher's forces had arrived two or three hours earlier then Napoleon might have disengaged his army and retreated, but by the time that the Prussians intervened the French army was almost wholly committed to the fight and disengagement was impossible. The Emperor was not just defeated, he was routed."
"An easier question to answer than 'who won the battle?' Is 'who lost the battle?', and the answer must be Napoleon. The Duke and Blücher both offered leadership, but Napoleon left the conduct of the battle to Marshal Ney, who, though braver than most men, did little more than hurl troops against the most skillful defensive general of the age. The French had the time and the men to break Wellington's line, but they failed, partly because the Duke defended so cleverly, and partly because the French never coordinated and all-arms assault on the allied line. They delayed the start of the battle on a day when Wellington was praying for time. They wasted men in a time-consuming assault that lasted much of the afternoon. And why Napoleon entrusted the battle's conduct to Ney is a mystery; Ney was certainly brave, but the Emperor damned him as 'too stupid to be able to succeed', so why rely on him? And, when the French did achieve their one great success, the capture of La Haie Sainte, which enabled them to occupy the forward slope of Wellington's ridge, the Emperor refused to reinforce the centre and so gave the Duke time to bring up his own reinforcements. Finally, when the Imperial Guard did attack, it was too few and too late, and by that time, the Prussians were on the French flank and threatening their rear."
December 14, 2023
The Tyrant returns! Or depending upon point of view, The Glorious Emperor returns!
This story is told from many points of view with just enough political and diplomatic background to make the situation understandable. The primary objective is painting a portrait of what it was like to be on those bloody fields. Cornwell is never satisfied with a simple account of troop movements. Those familiar with his novels will not be disappointed as he breathes life... and death into the tale. However, this book is not as well written as the novels. Repetitious information and wording is irritating and distracting. For instance we are informed that it remained to be seen if Marshal Soult possessed the needed administrative talent. Approximately 40 lines later it again remained to be seen if Soult possessed the ability. I noticed several similar instances which is not something I expected from one of my favorite authors. Fortunately, things improve and something akin to Cornwell's usual clear and fast paced writing style comes to the fore.
Cornwell recounts details which are frequently ignored or glossed over by some writers. For instance, he correctly identifies Wellington's army as the English-Dutch army. When I was a teenager I read several accounts of the battle and played Avalon Hill's Waterloo game before I understood just how much of the army was made up of Dutch-Belgian troops. There are also accounts of the actions of the Prince of Orange, known as Slender Billy. This allied commander, out of his depth in this battle, is often ignored. The Prussians and Marshal Blucher in particular are given due credit for their part in winning the campaign. Some few words give the reader a feel for Napoleon's life in exile on the island of Elba and for his motivation to escape. There are also a few details concerning how he escaped.
Bernard Cornwell continues to write incredibly detailed, riveting and accurate accounts of battle and war.
This story is told from many points of view with just enough political and diplomatic background to make the situation understandable. The primary objective is painting a portrait of what it was like to be on those bloody fields. Cornwell is never satisfied with a simple account of troop movements. Those familiar with his novels will not be disappointed as he breathes life... and death into the tale. However, this book is not as well written as the novels. Repetitious information and wording is irritating and distracting. For instance we are informed that it remained to be seen if Marshal Soult possessed the needed administrative talent. Approximately 40 lines later it again remained to be seen if Soult possessed the ability. I noticed several similar instances which is not something I expected from one of my favorite authors. Fortunately, things improve and something akin to Cornwell's usual clear and fast paced writing style comes to the fore.
Cornwell recounts details which are frequently ignored or glossed over by some writers. For instance, he correctly identifies Wellington's army as the English-Dutch army. When I was a teenager I read several accounts of the battle and played Avalon Hill's Waterloo game before I understood just how much of the army was made up of Dutch-Belgian troops. There are also accounts of the actions of the Prince of Orange, known as Slender Billy. This allied commander, out of his depth in this battle, is often ignored. The Prussians and Marshal Blucher in particular are given due credit for their part in winning the campaign. Some few words give the reader a feel for Napoleon's life in exile on the island of Elba and for his motivation to escape. There are also a few details concerning how he escaped.
Bernard Cornwell continues to write incredibly detailed, riveting and accurate accounts of battle and war.
May 25, 2019
Reading as a buddy read with Hana. We had both read An Infamous Army by Georgette Heyer & were keen to learn more.
& I loved this lavishly illustrated book.
I've never read any fiction by Cornwall, but I am certainly going to look for it now.
Cornwall's writing style is very readable & approachable. I'm not a historian, so I like this.
For example regarding Slender Billy (William of the Netherlands)
He wrote to his parents:"We had a magnificent affair against Napoleon today... it was my corps which principally gave battle & to which we owe the victory." It is fairer to say the allied victory owed a great deal more to the French skirmisher who managed to put a musket ball in the Prince of Orange's shoulder.
He also in mentions the scavengers that combed the battlefields robbing & sometimes murdering wounded soldiers.
There is also the touching like the letter Major Arthur Heyland wrote to his family.
Of course this book is about Wellington & Napoleon but Cornwall also lets Prussian Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, Fürst von Wahlstatt shine. Who cannot admire a man who rode into battle at 72 years old & when visiting London later on said, "What a city to sack"
What a guy.
If anyone can recommend a book about Blucher in English I'd be grateful.
Watching the 2015 Waterloo re-enactment on TV, I was very struck by how small an area they fought in. I found this picture from a 2009 re-enactment that gives an idea of the scale.
Just a minor quibble. As a big Georgette Heyer fan I was hoping to read again about both Johnny Kincaid & Harry Smith. (The Spanish Bride)Both are in the book but only Kincaid is in the index. Hopefully this will be fixed in later editions.
& I loved this lavishly illustrated book.
I've never read any fiction by Cornwall, but I am certainly going to look for it now.
Cornwall's writing style is very readable & approachable. I'm not a historian, so I like this.
For example regarding Slender Billy (William of the Netherlands)
He wrote to his parents:"We had a magnificent affair against Napoleon today... it was my corps which principally gave battle & to which we owe the victory." It is fairer to say the allied victory owed a great deal more to the French skirmisher who managed to put a musket ball in the Prince of Orange's shoulder.
He also in mentions the scavengers that combed the battlefields robbing & sometimes murdering wounded soldiers.
There is also the touching like the letter Major Arthur Heyland wrote to his family.
Of course this book is about Wellington & Napoleon but Cornwall also lets Prussian Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, Fürst von Wahlstatt shine. Who cannot admire a man who rode into battle at 72 years old & when visiting London later on said, "What a city to sack"
What a guy.
If anyone can recommend a book about Blucher in English I'd be grateful.
Watching the 2015 Waterloo re-enactment on TV, I was very struck by how small an area they fought in. I found this picture from a 2009 re-enactment that gives an idea of the scale.
Just a minor quibble. As a big Georgette Heyer fan I was hoping to read again about both Johnny Kincaid & Harry Smith. (The Spanish Bride)Both are in the book but only Kincaid is in the index. Hopefully this will be fixed in later editions.
February 14, 2023
Approximately a year ago, I read Cornwell's Sharpe book about Waterloo. When I came upon this book, I initially thought that it was the same book but with a different cover. I was surprised and pleased to see that this was a military history book covering the battle. While it may be argued that yet another book on Waterloo is nothing new, the ability of Cornwell as a historical fiction writer transfers flawlessly to military history. This Battle of Waterloo reads like an adventure novel, though epic in scope and grim in the recounting of this famous battle.
The flawless pace of the story is complemented by notes taken from the diaries of the participants. Now with all that praise out of the way be mindful that this is a military history and can be somewhat dense. Concepts like "battalion" and "regiment" are used interchangeably when they are not. A Regiment is an administrative unit in the British Army. Some Regiments consisted of a single battalion, most had two, and a few had three or more. During this time it was rather rare for two battalions of the same regiment to fight alongside each other in the same campaign (at Waterloo only two regiments had such distinction). Thus when Cornwell references "Regiments" such as "52nd Regiment" he means the battalion as the representative of that Regiment. Also, the use of term "Guardsman" is used for the purposes of clarity, but soldiers of the British Guards units were still called by rank, eg "Private", even if of the Guards.
Also about numbers- all three of the Armies deployed at Waterloo were divided into Corps- the British-Dutch army and the Prussian army were divided into three Corps and Corwell says the French have four because he counts the Imperial Guard as a Corps (which it effectively was). In this regard, a Corps could be 10K to 30K men or more. It could deploy cavalry, infantry, and artillery. In turn a Corps was broken into divisions, thus the French 1st Army Corps was divided into four infantry divisions (4k-5K strong). Each such division had its own supporting artillery. A division is further split into brigades-such as the 2nd Infantry Division of the 1st Army Corps contained two brigades (one of seven battalions and the other six). Battalions are further split into companies (British units had 10 companies, French had 8). Thus the "order of hierarchy" goes Army, then Corps, then Division, then Brigade, down to Battalion and Company.
That out of the way-the Battle of Waterloo was truly epic and a mass of confusion. Napoleon made some uncharacteristic mistakes and his Marshalls really let him down. Masterfully written, eminently readable and full of fascinating details about the battle-this is one of the best books on the Battle of Waterloo out there.
The flawless pace of the story is complemented by notes taken from the diaries of the participants. Now with all that praise out of the way be mindful that this is a military history and can be somewhat dense. Concepts like "battalion" and "regiment" are used interchangeably when they are not. A Regiment is an administrative unit in the British Army. Some Regiments consisted of a single battalion, most had two, and a few had three or more. During this time it was rather rare for two battalions of the same regiment to fight alongside each other in the same campaign (at Waterloo only two regiments had such distinction). Thus when Cornwell references "Regiments" such as "52nd Regiment" he means the battalion as the representative of that Regiment. Also, the use of term "Guardsman" is used for the purposes of clarity, but soldiers of the British Guards units were still called by rank, eg "Private", even if of the Guards.
Also about numbers- all three of the Armies deployed at Waterloo were divided into Corps- the British-Dutch army and the Prussian army were divided into three Corps and Corwell says the French have four because he counts the Imperial Guard as a Corps (which it effectively was). In this regard, a Corps could be 10K to 30K men or more. It could deploy cavalry, infantry, and artillery. In turn a Corps was broken into divisions, thus the French 1st Army Corps was divided into four infantry divisions (4k-5K strong). Each such division had its own supporting artillery. A division is further split into brigades-such as the 2nd Infantry Division of the 1st Army Corps contained two brigades (one of seven battalions and the other six). Battalions are further split into companies (British units had 10 companies, French had 8). Thus the "order of hierarchy" goes Army, then Corps, then Division, then Brigade, down to Battalion and Company.
That out of the way-the Battle of Waterloo was truly epic and a mass of confusion. Napoleon made some uncharacteristic mistakes and his Marshalls really let him down. Masterfully written, eminently readable and full of fascinating details about the battle-this is one of the best books on the Battle of Waterloo out there.
July 27, 2015
This was a mixed bag for me. Starting with the good, as an idiot's (ie, moi) guide to the Battle of Waterloo, it was very good. Before reading it, all I knew about Waterloo, other than Wellington's winning it and Napoleon's being packed off to St. Helena, was dancing at the Duchess of Richmond's ball the night before and "The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton." This was compact and for the most part, engagingly told. I now have a clear sense of the various battles, stands, and personalities, which is to the good.
Frankly, I expected something by a writer of Cornwell's stature to be better written. The frequent shifts in tense drove me nuts. In addition, he repeated anecdotes and analyses (I remember it from the first time, thankyouverymuch) and had another writing tic of ending up a section with a one sentence (and sometimes a sentence fragment) paragraph. That staled quickly. His diction could have been improved. I do not think prevarication means what he thinks it means. I suspect Cornwell is one of those writers who is too big to be edited, alas.
As I've said, I've no basis on which to criticize his historiography. My gut reaction says that Napoleon and Ney couldn't have been quite so incompetent as Cornwell portrays them, nor Wellington so god-like; it was a near thing, after all. It's a matter of the defects of its virtues, I suppose. I like footnotes, but this was clearly mostly compiled from secondary sources and his own vast store of knowledge about the period. Geared to the general reader, so lacking any real historical rigor. I thought the best parts, as in the most evocative, were the quotations from first-person accounts and the pictures; the book was worth reading for those alone.
One last reaction is that Cornwell is superb at protraying the carnage of war. As I get older, I find it harder and harder to understand why disagreements have to end in limbs flying and lives lost and ruined. Wouldn't tiddlywinks be a better choice? (I stole that from a Mad Magazine parody of Wellington and Napoleon remembered from my youth.)
Frankly, I expected something by a writer of Cornwell's stature to be better written. The frequent shifts in tense drove me nuts. In addition, he repeated anecdotes and analyses (I remember it from the first time, thankyouverymuch) and had another writing tic of ending up a section with a one sentence (and sometimes a sentence fragment) paragraph. That staled quickly. His diction could have been improved. I do not think prevarication means what he thinks it means. I suspect Cornwell is one of those writers who is too big to be edited, alas.
As I've said, I've no basis on which to criticize his historiography. My gut reaction says that Napoleon and Ney couldn't have been quite so incompetent as Cornwell portrays them, nor Wellington so god-like; it was a near thing, after all. It's a matter of the defects of its virtues, I suppose. I like footnotes, but this was clearly mostly compiled from secondary sources and his own vast store of knowledge about the period. Geared to the general reader, so lacking any real historical rigor. I thought the best parts, as in the most evocative, were the quotations from first-person accounts and the pictures; the book was worth reading for those alone.
One last reaction is that Cornwell is superb at protraying the carnage of war. As I get older, I find it harder and harder to understand why disagreements have to end in limbs flying and lives lost and ruined. Wouldn't tiddlywinks be a better choice? (I stole that from a Mad Magazine parody of Wellington and Napoleon remembered from my youth.)
July 2, 2015
"Some battles change nothing. Waterloo changed almost everything."
Two hundred years ago this year three battles were fought that altered the course of European history. For over 50 years Britain and France had fought each other for world dominance. But this fight was different. This time the European powers united in one of the first effective trans-national coalitions. The aim: to defeat an aging Emperor who had come back from exile to wage a new war.
It was a cliff-hanger and right up until nightfall on that terribly long day, June 18, 1815, the outcome of the battle was in doubt. Lord Wellington said it:"It has been a damned nice thing—the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."
Bernard Cornwell's popular history of this great, horrible, brutal, near-run battle is simply splendid: brilliant storytelling, balanced, vivid first person testimony, lucid analysis, and characters major and minor who come alive (and all too often die). Cornwell's book is filled with helpful maps and battle diagrams, glorious portraits and paintings of battle scenes, and best of all, meticulous, absolutely clear descriptions of battle formations, maneuvers and tactics. Things that have always been a bit fuzzy in my brain suddenly came into focus.
Cornwell takes the reader through it step by step:
Two hundred years ago this year three battles were fought that altered the course of European history. For over 50 years Britain and France had fought each other for world dominance. But this fight was different. This time the European powers united in one of the first effective trans-national coalitions. The aim: to defeat an aging Emperor who had come back from exile to wage a new war.
It was a cliff-hanger and right up until nightfall on that terribly long day, June 18, 1815, the outcome of the battle was in doubt. Lord Wellington said it:"It has been a damned nice thing—the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."
Bernard Cornwell's popular history of this great, horrible, brutal, near-run battle is simply splendid: brilliant storytelling, balanced, vivid first person testimony, lucid analysis, and characters major and minor who come alive (and all too often die). Cornwell's book is filled with helpful maps and battle diagrams, glorious portraits and paintings of battle scenes, and best of all, meticulous, absolutely clear descriptions of battle formations, maneuvers and tactics. Things that have always been a bit fuzzy in my brain suddenly came into focus.
Wellington was a master of the 'reverse slope'. Very simply, that means he liked to conceal his troops behind a hill. At Busaco the British objective was to hold the high hill, but if Wellington had positioned his men on the crest, or on the forward slope, then they would have become targets for the deadly efficient French artillery.By placing his troops just behind the crest, or on the reverse slope, Wellington kept them safe--and invisible. Cornwell is great at explaining why commanders on the field made the decisions they did; for example, Ney fought Wellington at Busaco and Ney may well have hesitated to attack at Quatre-Bras because he (incorrectly) suspected hidden troops might be massed behind the hill at the crucial intersection. And speaking of intersections and Quatre-Bras here is Cornwell making it all clear again with maps and this:
The Waterloo campaign is all about roads. Roads and crossroads. The armies needed the roads. Cavalry and infantry could advance across country without roads though their progress would be painfully slow, but guns and supply wagons had to have roads.Of course. But I never quite got so completely before. Thanks to Cornwell, I now have a much better grasp not just of Waterloo, but also much of European military history from the 18th century through to World War I. The roles that skirmishers, artillery, cavalry and infantry played in battle are now crystal clear to me, as are formations like columns, lines and squares.
Cornwell takes the reader through it step by step:
Yet if a column was psychologically powerful if also had two weaknesses. A column was desperately vulnerable to cannon fire and only the men in the outer two ranks and files could use their muskets. If a column has seventeen ranks of thirty men each, totaling 510 men, then only sixty in the first two ranks, and the two men on the outside of each rank, can actually fire at the enemy.. fewer than one quarter in all.But it never got boring. In fact I found the book hard to put down. Cornwell has such a gift for setting the scene: the torrential rain, the vast impenetrable fields of rye taller than a man's head, the horrors of artillery shells raining down on massed columns. He builds the suspense with novelistic skill, but also a keen sense of the moment and its significance
'Despite the weather, despite the darkness and despite the defeat they had suffered at Ligny, the Prussian army was now just 12 miles from Wellington's. They were difficult miles, across streams and through steep hills...but Blucher had promised...a third trap was set. Wellington was the bait, Napoleon the intended victim and Blucher the executioner. It was dawn on Sunday, 18 June 1815My Goodreads friend ***Carol*** and I read this together, along with Georgette Heyer's excellent novel, An Infamous Army. Thank you, Carol, for the inspiration and the fun of sharing these two great books.
October 28, 2023
Bernard Cornwell, known for his historical fiction, has compiled a detailed account of the Battle of Waterloo, which took place in Belgium in 1815 and ended Napoleonic Wars. As Cornwell points out, "it is one of the most studied and written-about battles in history" but I had never before read a comprehensive account. It involved over 300,000 troops. This narrative non-fiction vividly portrays what it was like on the field of battle. Cornwell had heavily researched the Napoleonic Wars for his Sharpe Series, and here he compiles his research into an eminently readable narrative of the events leading up to the battle, the battle itself, and the impact of the results on history.
It relies heavily on journals written by the combatants on both sides. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of the contrasting leadership styles of Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington. It clearly delineates the role of the Prussians, under Field Marshall von Blücher, who honored his word to come to the aid of Wellington. Cornwell employs his immense authorial skills to create a sense of dramatic tension even though the reader already knows the ending. He establishes the context and analyzes the “what ifs” that always arise in a conflict of this size and import. If you have never read a full account of what happened at Waterloo, this book definitely provides all the essential information (and more) in a manner that is easily digested.
It relies heavily on journals written by the combatants on both sides. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of the contrasting leadership styles of Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington. It clearly delineates the role of the Prussians, under Field Marshall von Blücher, who honored his word to come to the aid of Wellington. Cornwell employs his immense authorial skills to create a sense of dramatic tension even though the reader already knows the ending. He establishes the context and analyzes the “what ifs” that always arise in a conflict of this size and import. If you have never read a full account of what happened at Waterloo, this book definitely provides all the essential information (and more) in a manner that is easily digested.
June 11, 2015
In the end, I gave this one 4 Stars but it was touch and go for awhile. I had to recalibrate my expectations of a Cornwell book. This was his first non-fiction book and I was expecting a telling of the battle more like his awesome fictional tales. The book was mostly a recounting of a very disjointed battle by participants. Very hard to get a big picture of the battle. But the accounts of the battle are excellent and the maps and illustrations are timely and outstanding. Highly recommended but you may want to supplement with another account that tells the battle in a more comprehensive manner.
August 30, 2019
Hay dos 'aguas' muy famosas que han pasado a formar parte del vocabulario por haberse convertido en metónimos de las caídas de políticos famosos. Waterloo y Watergate. Mientras que el segundo ha dejado en nuestro lenguaje solamente un sufijo que anexar a todo tipo de escándalos (X-Gate, etc.), el primero se nos ha ido completo. Y significa "caída" "derrota" "final". Gracias Abba.
¿Qué es lo que sabe la mayoría de la gente sobre Waterloo? Creo que casi todo mundo sabe que es cuando Napoleón perdió de forma final. Pero sólo los que recuerdan sus clases de historia universal recuerdan que esta derrota puso punto final a lo que se suponía iba a ser el "Napoleón Strikes Back" después de su primer exilio en la isla de Elba, y que terminó mandándolo a su exilio definitivo en Santa Helena.
Lo que muy pocos, los muy entusiastas saben, son todos los episodios de la batalla. Algo había oído yo de la defensa de La Haile Sainte, pero no mucho más. Al igual que muchos otros legos, yo sólo sabía que Napoleón perdió. (Y eso que puedo citar la mayoría de las batallas de las Guerras Napoleónicas y sus resultados).
Yo no sabía hasta qué punto había sido una pelea tan cerrada, en la que el ejército francés pudo haber ganado en varios puntos. La pericia y la experiencia eran titánicas aún después del episodio de Rusia y la Guerra de la Sexta Coalición y en realidad, hubo ciertos errorcitos de parte de Napoleón que, de no haberse cometido, habrían dado un resultado totalmente distinto. Además, los británicos-hanoverianos-brunswickianos-holandeses habían aguantado de forma espléndida hasta el alivio que resultó la llegada de los prusianos.
Cornwell presenta esta historia de dos formas: una crónica amena de la batalla junto con consideraciones técnicas (los tipos de formación en línea o columna, los ángulos de disparo de los cañones, las ventajas de los fusiles y mosquetes, las armaduras de las caballerías ligeras y pesadas, etc.). Y también una especie de historia oral con testimonios de ambos bandos. Esto permite construir un relato que da voz a mucha gente y nos permite poner en perspectiva que, pese a ser una época de uniformes muy bonitos, se trató de una campaña llena de brutalidad por todos lados con outcomes no muy distintos en la esfera humana a los que pasaran desde un par de milenios antes y todavía habrían de pasar hasta un siglo después.
Así que se trata de un libro de historia absolutamente recomendable. Me he encontrado con muchos libros de historia militar que, pese a tratar temas fascinantes, asfixian al lector con discusiones sobre flanqueo y columnas. Éste no es el caso. Cornwell es primariamente un novelista y se empeña en contarnos la historia de este día fatídico de forma en la que todos podamos entenderla.
¿Qué es lo que sabe la mayoría de la gente sobre Waterloo? Creo que casi todo mundo sabe que es cuando Napoleón perdió de forma final. Pero sólo los que recuerdan sus clases de historia universal recuerdan que esta derrota puso punto final a lo que se suponía iba a ser el "Napoleón Strikes Back" después de su primer exilio en la isla de Elba, y que terminó mandándolo a su exilio definitivo en Santa Helena.
Lo que muy pocos, los muy entusiastas saben, son todos los episodios de la batalla. Algo había oído yo de la defensa de La Haile Sainte, pero no mucho más. Al igual que muchos otros legos, yo sólo sabía que Napoleón perdió. (Y eso que puedo citar la mayoría de las batallas de las Guerras Napoleónicas y sus resultados).
Yo no sabía hasta qué punto había sido una pelea tan cerrada, en la que el ejército francés pudo haber ganado en varios puntos. La pericia y la experiencia eran titánicas aún después del episodio de Rusia y la Guerra de la Sexta Coalición y en realidad, hubo ciertos errorcitos de parte de Napoleón que, de no haberse cometido, habrían dado un resultado totalmente distinto. Además, los británicos-hanoverianos-brunswickianos-holandeses habían aguantado de forma espléndida hasta el alivio que resultó la llegada de los prusianos.
Cornwell presenta esta historia de dos formas: una crónica amena de la batalla junto con consideraciones técnicas (los tipos de formación en línea o columna, los ángulos de disparo de los cañones, las ventajas de los fusiles y mosquetes, las armaduras de las caballerías ligeras y pesadas, etc.). Y también una especie de historia oral con testimonios de ambos bandos. Esto permite construir un relato que da voz a mucha gente y nos permite poner en perspectiva que, pese a ser una época de uniformes muy bonitos, se trató de una campaña llena de brutalidad por todos lados con outcomes no muy distintos en la esfera humana a los que pasaran desde un par de milenios antes y todavía habrían de pasar hasta un siglo después.
Así que se trata de un libro de historia absolutamente recomendable. Me he encontrado con muchos libros de historia militar que, pese a tratar temas fascinantes, asfixian al lector con discusiones sobre flanqueo y columnas. Éste no es el caso. Cornwell es primariamente un novelista y se empeña en contarnos la historia de este día fatídico de forma en la que todos podamos entenderla.
June 25, 2015
There is nothing dull about this book; I could not put it down. Cornwell used his novelist skills to tell the story of Waterloo through the words and experience of the soldiers’ letters, diaries and memoirs. He brought the battle to life from both the French, British, Dutch, Flemish and German soldiers’ viewpoints.
For the 200th anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, Bernard Cornwell published a non-fiction book on the subject. A number of years ago he had written a historical fiction book about Waterloo in his Richard Sharpe series. This battle was so complex and the result of the battles so far reaching that one could spend their life studying it.
France was the dominating global power prior to this battle. Britain emerged the dominant global power of the 19th century as a result of winning this battle. Cornwell dramatically shows the consequence of the battle, the scale of slaughter and suffering that took place in the fields ten miles south of Brussels remains shocking. The entire battle took place in a five mile area.
Cornwell show how the British forces consisting of English, Dutch and Belgium soldiers and the Prussian army fought against the French army. Cornwell is the master of battle scenes in his historical fiction books. Because of that he brings the battle to life for the average reader.
Cornwell did an enormous amount of research preparing to write this book. He used diaries, letters, memoirs, military records and reports as well as newspaper reports. The author helps clarify the complex battle for the non-scholar. It would be great to read this book just before visiting the Waterloo site. I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. I am going to buy the hardcover edition for the maps and pictures. Dugald Bruce Lockhart narrated the book.
For the 200th anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, Bernard Cornwell published a non-fiction book on the subject. A number of years ago he had written a historical fiction book about Waterloo in his Richard Sharpe series. This battle was so complex and the result of the battles so far reaching that one could spend their life studying it.
France was the dominating global power prior to this battle. Britain emerged the dominant global power of the 19th century as a result of winning this battle. Cornwell dramatically shows the consequence of the battle, the scale of slaughter and suffering that took place in the fields ten miles south of Brussels remains shocking. The entire battle took place in a five mile area.
Cornwell show how the British forces consisting of English, Dutch and Belgium soldiers and the Prussian army fought against the French army. Cornwell is the master of battle scenes in his historical fiction books. Because of that he brings the battle to life for the average reader.
Cornwell did an enormous amount of research preparing to write this book. He used diaries, letters, memoirs, military records and reports as well as newspaper reports. The author helps clarify the complex battle for the non-scholar. It would be great to read this book just before visiting the Waterloo site. I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. I am going to buy the hardcover edition for the maps and pictures. Dugald Bruce Lockhart narrated the book.
October 27, 2015
I've read Cornwell before and enjoyed his fiction so I was surprised to see that he had authored a genuine history. I am now further surprised at how good it is. Without a doubt this book is the clearest detailed account of the Battle of Waterloo I have read. The book is very readable and laymen will have no trouble following the tide of this battle and all its facets. The author's copious citing of the reports and diaries of the combatants conveys a realism to the events described that transport the reader into an unimaginable hell of that battlefield. I also couldn't help but be struck by the parallels that Waterloo had with another battle that took place some 50 years later at Gettysburg. I'm sure these two battles have been compared and discussed as well they should. This book would be a tremendous aid to a such a discussion. Definitely a history worth reading.
August 16, 2020
While the illustrations, paintings and excerpts from letters who were at Waterloo are very interesting, the rest of the book is mediocre at best, unless your task is to save Belgium from an invading French Army.
June 14, 2015
In a development that will surprise absolutely no one who is familiar with Cornwell's work, his first foray into non-fiction is fantastic.
Cornwell seamlessly transitions from the novel to historical monograph, bringing all of his fiction-writing skills to bear to create the absolute best kind of narrative history. He's got story beats and cliff hanger endings. He's got amazing and flawed characters, at once heroic and identifiable.
He doesn't give short shrift to scholarship. Waterloo is impeccably researched, relying heavily on personal accounts from the combatants, carefully parsing reality from legend and always being willing to throw up his hands and say "I don't know."
I absolutely cannot say enough good things about this book. Cornwell has managed to bring a fresh and fascinating perspective to one of the most well-studied (and well-documented) battles in modern history. If you shrug and say "we don't need another book on Waterloo," you are going to miss a treat.
By serving story as well as scholarship, Cornwell has produced a uniquely accessible work, that can be read and enjoyed by neophytes and experienced historians alike. In this, he has done a greater service to the subject than 100 boring, dry historical monographs. Waterloo is both serious scholarship and edge of your seat drama, and you should read it immediately, even if you don't like military history. Especially if you don't like military history.
Cornwell seamlessly transitions from the novel to historical monograph, bringing all of his fiction-writing skills to bear to create the absolute best kind of narrative history. He's got story beats and cliff hanger endings. He's got amazing and flawed characters, at once heroic and identifiable.
He doesn't give short shrift to scholarship. Waterloo is impeccably researched, relying heavily on personal accounts from the combatants, carefully parsing reality from legend and always being willing to throw up his hands and say "I don't know."
I absolutely cannot say enough good things about this book. Cornwell has managed to bring a fresh and fascinating perspective to one of the most well-studied (and well-documented) battles in modern history. If you shrug and say "we don't need another book on Waterloo," you are going to miss a treat.
By serving story as well as scholarship, Cornwell has produced a uniquely accessible work, that can be read and enjoyed by neophytes and experienced historians alike. In this, he has done a greater service to the subject than 100 boring, dry historical monographs. Waterloo is both serious scholarship and edge of your seat drama, and you should read it immediately, even if you don't like military history. Especially if you don't like military history.
May 13, 2016
While reading Waterloo, you’ll discover that Bernard Cornwell has brought his considerable writing talents as a novelist to bear on this straight history of one of the most famous battles in the history of warfare. He skillfully ties together the story of three battles, (Ligny, Quatre-Bras, and Waterloo) three armies, (Allied, Prussian, and French) and the three commanders (Wellington, Blucher, and Napoleon.) Cornwell supplies plenty of facts and figures but he doesn’t let them overwhelm the narrative of the story that he is telling. He makes the point, more than once, that trying to tell the history of a battle is like trying to tell the history of a ball. So many things are happening at once while at the same time there are very discreet elements. Cornwell excellently weaves those elements together while ensuring that you don't lose sight of the dance.
I read this as an audiobook. The narrator, Dugald Bruce, was very good. Bernard Cornwall narrates the forward, preface, and afterword.
I read this as an audiobook. The narrator, Dugald Bruce, was very good. Bernard Cornwall narrates the forward, preface, and afterword.
December 17, 2015
I was totally blown away by this book; this is my first book that I read by Bernard Cornwell, but it sure won't be the last. I got the hardcover edition which is actually a piece of art, marvelous to look at and to hold in your hands. And I have to say that the quality of the writing equals that of the premium edition version. I simply loved how Cornwell sifted through the exhaustive bibliography for the most correct information and how he presented the battles, the settings and the characters. He relies on many eye witness accounts, which adds a certain realism to what could easily be a dry history lesson. All in all this has been a great purchase.
January 1, 2023
Uma interessante descrição de uma das batalhas mais emblemáticas da História. Com descrições muito detalhadas e gráficas, o livro explora os estados de espírito dos principais protagonistas: Napoleão Bonaparte e o Duque de Wellignton. Um confronto entre diferentes ideais do mundo e a derrota final do grande conquistador que foi Napoleão. O desfecho desta batalha desenhou a nossa Modernidade. O livro contém, ainda, detalhes interessantes acerca de personalidade do Duque de Wellignton, sobre o seu carácter elegante e estóico. No fim, apesar da vitória, vetou a execução de Bonaparte. Os grandes têm que se respeitar: nas vitórias ou nas derrotas. Napoleão ainda sobreviveu mais uns anos ao fatídico ano de 1815. As suas memórias hesitam em admitir a grande derrota, apesar do exílio e da abdicação. A França e a Europa não seriam as mesmas depois de Waterloo.
March 16, 2016
Review for audiobook ~ 3 stars story ♫ 5 stars narration.
I liked it well enough. I did learn a lot about Waterloo with this book. I was pretty amazed to learn that when this battle was fought, Napoleon was already in exile and this was his attempt to regain power. If he had just stayed put, there wouldn't have been so many lives lost. The brutality of the war was a bit depressing. There was quite a bit of gory details that made me sad. I could have done without detailed accounts of the death and mistreatment of the horses... In the audiobook I was unable to skim past those sad, and awful parts. I give it 3 stars as it was well detailed on both sides of the battle.
The narration was superb. 5 stars. I really enjoyed his narration and it made the book better.
I liked it well enough. I did learn a lot about Waterloo with this book. I was pretty amazed to learn that when this battle was fought, Napoleon was already in exile and this was his attempt to regain power. If he had just stayed put, there wouldn't have been so many lives lost. The brutality of the war was a bit depressing. There was quite a bit of gory details that made me sad. I could have done without detailed accounts of the death and mistreatment of the horses... In the audiobook I was unable to skim past those sad, and awful parts. I give it 3 stars as it was well detailed on both sides of the battle.
The narration was superb. 5 stars. I really enjoyed his narration and it made the book better.
April 24, 2016
-Otro acercamiento a la famosa batalla, pero no otro más simplemente.-
Género. Ensayo.
Lo que nos cuenta. Aproximación a la batalla de Waterloo, previa localización del lector en el momento histórico, en las dos batallas previas y absolutamente relacionadas con el posterior desarrollo de Waterloo.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
Género. Ensayo.
Lo que nos cuenta. Aproximación a la batalla de Waterloo, previa localización del lector en el momento histórico, en las dos batallas previas y absolutamente relacionadas con el posterior desarrollo de Waterloo.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
November 24, 2015
Cornwell is an entertaining writer, and even though book is not fiction, it still has that appealing air. There is a mistake about one of Napoleon's commanders, but that was minor considering the scope of the book and the campaign.
January 12, 2017
Good in depth history of the battle. I actually learned quite a bit.
April 21, 2018
Crec que és el llibre que més m'ha durat a la tauleta de nit, en tota la meva vida. No perquè no m'hagi agradat, sinó tot el contrari. Me'n vaig llegir la meitat d'una glopada, i després vaig decidir anar intercalant lectures. Durant dos anys i mig. Fins que l'he reprès i n'he enllestit l'altra meitat en una setmana. Mai va arribar a la prestatgeria. Mai vaig dubtar. Mai vaig desar-lo a la meva biblioteca per un altre moment. Ha estat tot aquest temps a la tauleta de nit, esperant el seu torn.
I ha valgut la pena, perquè és un assaig monumental i extraordinari sobre la batalla de Waterloo, l'abans i el després, però sobretot el durant, tots els fets bèl·lics i extremadament violents que van marcar el destí d'Europa.
L'allau de noms i dades és anorreador, però Cornwell els empra amb saviesa per construir una novel·la coralíssima i emocionant, plena de detalls corprenedors.
De petit, vaig visitar Waterloo amb els meus pares. No voldria trigar a tornar-hi.
I ha valgut la pena, perquè és un assaig monumental i extraordinari sobre la batalla de Waterloo, l'abans i el després, però sobretot el durant, tots els fets bèl·lics i extremadament violents que van marcar el destí d'Europa.
L'allau de noms i dades és anorreador, però Cornwell els empra amb saviesa per construir una novel·la coralíssima i emocionant, plena de detalls corprenedors.
De petit, vaig visitar Waterloo amb els meus pares. No voldria trigar a tornar-hi.
December 15, 2016
Cornwell’s Waterloo: The History of Four Days, Three Armies, and Three Battles begins with the return of the five-foot-six thorn in the side of Europe’s monarchies that was Napoleon’s return from his first exile on Alba. We rapidly move through his re-acquisition of France’s military might and the scene in which his soon-to-be opponent Arthur Wellesley is informed of Napoleon’s return. I did find it funny that so many British officers and soldiers were so stoked at the news. I can only imagine they were less happy about the situation after the massive bloodletting that was the Waterloo campaign.
We quickly cover Napoleon’s march north into Belgium with the aim of wedging himself between the British-Dutch and Prussian armies and defeating them in detail. This includes the lead-up battles at Quatre Bras and Ligny. Both are interesting stories in and of themselves but the meat of the book has to do with Wellington’s stand at the ridge of Mont-Saint-Jean, where the British-Dutch army fought for many grueling hours in an attempt to stave off the repeated French assaults on their position before the Prussian army under Blucher could arrive on their flank and make their position a much stronger one. As always hindsight is 20/20 but Cornwell still manages to work up a good amount of tension as the battle never seemed to be an obvious win for either side until the matter was decided.
All of the famous episodes of the battle here are covered in bloody detail with plenty of firsthand accounts: the vicious fighting at the two farmhouses of Hougoumont and La Haye Sainte, the repeated attempts by French infantry to storm the ridge, Sergeant Ewart’s bloody capture of an Imperial Eagle, Marshal Ney’s ill-fated cavalry charge, and the climactic advance of the Imperial Guard. Anyone who knows Cornwell knows that he writes the hell out of combat stories whether it be cannon and musket or spears and shield walls and this book is hardly an exception. You can almost choke on the smoke from the muskets and artillery and you will certainly feel for the poor men (and women!) who were horribly wounded or killed in the fray. The pathos extends to the thousands of poor horses were killed or maimed and there was even a truly heartbreaking vignette about a poor kitten who was frightened out of Hougoumont and killed in the fighting.
Cornwell should write more non-fiction! His obviously thorough research combined with his wonderful ability as a storyteller really saturated this book with edutainment value. Comprehensively and clearly telling the story of a long, huge battle like Waterloo can’t be easy but his picture of what was going on and where never lessened in its clarity and emotional impact. His scope is able to switch from a bird’s eye view of the battlefield down to the smaller dramas that were played out all over the battlefield at a moment’s notice without any kind of jarring effect. The Harper hardcover edition I have is also just a beautiful book, with plenty of full-color portraits and battle paintings ending each chapter and easily-comprehended maps at the beginning them. I’m thoroughly content with this experience, it was totally entertaining and left me with a much, much greater comprehension of this famous scrap.
We quickly cover Napoleon’s march north into Belgium with the aim of wedging himself between the British-Dutch and Prussian armies and defeating them in detail. This includes the lead-up battles at Quatre Bras and Ligny. Both are interesting stories in and of themselves but the meat of the book has to do with Wellington’s stand at the ridge of Mont-Saint-Jean, where the British-Dutch army fought for many grueling hours in an attempt to stave off the repeated French assaults on their position before the Prussian army under Blucher could arrive on their flank and make their position a much stronger one. As always hindsight is 20/20 but Cornwell still manages to work up a good amount of tension as the battle never seemed to be an obvious win for either side until the matter was decided.
All of the famous episodes of the battle here are covered in bloody detail with plenty of firsthand accounts: the vicious fighting at the two farmhouses of Hougoumont and La Haye Sainte, the repeated attempts by French infantry to storm the ridge, Sergeant Ewart’s bloody capture of an Imperial Eagle, Marshal Ney’s ill-fated cavalry charge, and the climactic advance of the Imperial Guard. Anyone who knows Cornwell knows that he writes the hell out of combat stories whether it be cannon and musket or spears and shield walls and this book is hardly an exception. You can almost choke on the smoke from the muskets and artillery and you will certainly feel for the poor men (and women!) who were horribly wounded or killed in the fray. The pathos extends to the thousands of poor horses were killed or maimed and there was even a truly heartbreaking vignette about a poor kitten who was frightened out of Hougoumont and killed in the fighting.
Cornwell should write more non-fiction! His obviously thorough research combined with his wonderful ability as a storyteller really saturated this book with edutainment value. Comprehensively and clearly telling the story of a long, huge battle like Waterloo can’t be easy but his picture of what was going on and where never lessened in its clarity and emotional impact. His scope is able to switch from a bird’s eye view of the battlefield down to the smaller dramas that were played out all over the battlefield at a moment’s notice without any kind of jarring effect. The Harper hardcover edition I have is also just a beautiful book, with plenty of full-color portraits and battle paintings ending each chapter and easily-comprehended maps at the beginning them. I’m thoroughly content with this experience, it was totally entertaining and left me with a much, much greater comprehension of this famous scrap.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 790 reviews