Uh Wait, What?

The Morning of The Battle of Waterloo: the French Await Napoleon's Orders
Ernest Crofts
Source

Okay, in my haste to entertain you with my fictional tale of what might have been had the French won at Waterloo, I made a huge error. It's an error frequently fallen into by those who consider themselves experts in any field. Trying to explain something to someone, who may not be an expert in that field or perhaps know nothing at all about that field, without going into agonizing detail about that field. Perhaps assuming that the person to whom they are telling the story has the same intimate knowledge of the subject at hand.

Mea culpa, for I have done exactly that.

For instance, in telling the tale of how Napoléon averted disaster by having some guy named Bourmont killed, "accidentally" of course, I neglected to really tell you the whole story. I just kind of assumed everyone would say, "Oh yeah, Bourmont, kill that traitor." Most of you, no doubt, have no idea who that guy was. Unless you chased the link to the Wikipedia article about him. And really, who wants to constantly chase links during a story? I know I don't, my stance is always, "Come on, get on with it, I'm not chasing your bloody link again."

So this post is an attempt to at least get everyone on the same page concerning the Waterloo campaign, or more properly the Hundred Days campaign. Wikipedia does have a good article on the campaign which I'll let you track down at your leisure, or not at all should that be your desire.

Anyhoo ...

The Waterloo campaign was the final act of a long series of wars begun during the French Revolution, then continuing during Napoléon Bonaparte's reign as Emperor of France. Our focus is on the Napoleonic Wars, running from 1805 to 1815.

Now the French pretty much had things go their way up until about 1808, 1809 if you count the campaign that year against Austria, a French victory. But in 1808 the French got sucked into Spain, their Vietnam/Afghanistan if you will. Many historians call the Spanish campaign the bleeding ulcer, it was a constant drain on French resources and seriously hurt French morale.

Why Spain though? Well, you have to understand that the French had pretty much beaten down the Prussians, the Austrians, and the Russians. But every time they ended the war, the British would dig deep and come up with more money to finance yet another coalition to fight Napoléon. They had the advantage of their island and the most powerful navy on the planet between them and the French.

As much as Napoléon wanted to be done with those pesky islanders, he couldn't get to them. The Royal Navy had smashed the combined French and Spanish fleets (huh, the Spanish, I thought the French were their enemies) at Trafalgar. Napoléon was a master of land combat, never did understand the sea. A big advantage the British had was that their navy was constantly at sea, blockading the French and cutting off their trade from the rest of the world. The French mostly sat in port, plotting to drive the Brits off but never getting quite there. Though, for the most part, French ships were better, it ain't the ship, it's the crew. And the Royal Navy had some excellent sailors.

Anyhoo, why were the Brits so pissed off at the French, I mean besides the centuries of warfare and animosity between those two nations? Well, the British believed in trade, and making money from that trade. They liked the idea of a balance of power on the continent, better for trade and better for the British economy.

So the Napoleonic Wars could be viewed as a long squabble over hegemony in Europe. The French on the one hand wanting to dominate, the British on the other being quite opposed to that.

Long story short, Napoléon came up with this thing he called the Continental System whereby British trade would be locked out of Europe altogether. It might have worked had Napoléon thought it through a lot better than he did.

The Russians, being far from Paris, and being huge and kind of isolated, had made a lot of money trading with the British. Having that trade cut off really hurt the Russian economy, so they began trading with the British again, even after "allying" themselves with the French (after getting their asses kicked at the Battle of Friedland in 1807). Yup, that pissed Napoléon off, so he decided to invade Russia to enforce his Continental System.

Invade Russia, where have I heard that before?

At any rate, Napoléon took this huge army into Russia in 1812, many of those guys never returned home. It was the Emperor's first big defeat. Though he managed to scrape an army together in 1813, the French were driven back behind their own borders and the Campaign of 1814 was fought within France.

Yup, they lost and Napoléon was forced into exile on the island of Elba. Pretty much forced by circumstance and his own marshals to give up the throne altogether.

The Bourbon dynasty returned to France and pretty much tried to set the clock back to 1789. As if the Revolution had never happened. As is true of I'd say 95% of all royalty, the Bourbons were too stupid to make a go of it. They might have succeeded as the French people were pretty sick of the constant wars. But bring in the air-headed nobles swinging their titles and names around and suddenly Napoléon didn't seem all that bad.

The French people were pissed, the French Army was pissed, and the many veterans who had marched with Napoléon were also pissed. Like old soldiers everywhere, they had forgotten the horrors and the hardship and only remembered the "good times."

Napoléon heard all of this and decided to have another go at things. He landed on the coast of southern France with less than two thousand men, and within a month was back in Paris, back on the throne, and apparently willing to let bygones be bygones, he appealed for peace.

The allied powers (Great Britain, Prussia, Austria, Russia, Spain, Portugal, a slew of duchies and principalities, and France herself in the person of Talleyrand) had been meeting in Vienna to decide the future of Europe. Upon hearing of Napoléon's return they declared him an outlaw, they didn't declare war against France, they declared war against a person, Napoléon Bonaparte.

The Emperor had to scurry, basically slapping an army together in record time to contend with all of Europe. Small armies would suffice to watch the frontiers as it would take time for the Prussians, Austrians, and Russians to get their armies to France, but to go after a nearby enemy the Emperor put together a fairly creditable force, the Armée du Nord, or Army of the North, to strike into Belgium where a Prussian army under Blücher was waiting to advance on Paris and an Anglo-Allied army under the Duke of Wellington was waiting for the same.

Napoléon's thought process was pretty simple, destroy these two armies and the other nations might just say the hell with it and throw in the towel. Especially if he could destroy Wellington's army as it might convince the British government to put away their checkbook. No money to fight Napoléon and maybe he would leave everyone alone. (He'd never known a moment where the British weren't paying someone to fight him so you never know, maybe he would've been content with peace. At least for a while. Who knows?)

Here's how things stood at the beginning of June 1815 -

Source

Below is a map of the dispositions of Wellington and Blücher. Note that near the small crossroads village of Quatre Bras is a corps labeled as being under the command of the Prince of Orange, heir to the throne of the Netherlands. Twenty two years old and a full general (!)  in the British army, he commanded the Anglo-Allied troops in Belgium prior to Wellington's arrival. He was at Waterloo, the Butte du Lion on that field was erected over the spot where he was wounded, and he played a big part in the battle.

British historians denigrate his performance at the battle for various reasons. Dutch historians disagree. One can say that the Prince was young and inexperienced, this being his first command. But he did make mistakes and it did lead to unnecessary losses. Of course, a lot of far more experienced commanders have made similar errors. It's war, it's hard to be everywhere at once and understand everything going on amidst the powder smoke, the gunfire, and the screams of the dying.

Source

So the strategic big picture is that the French face two armies, they have one. If their enemy joins forces, the war is lost. If Napoléon can get between them, screen one while destroying the other, they had a chance at victory.

The Emperor determined that the Prussians would be attacked first, drive them back on their lines of supply running to the Rhine, in the opposite direction of Wellington's lines of supply which ran to the Channel ports, thence to England.

But could he get there fast enough, catching his opponents off guard?

In real life he did.

"Napoléon has humbugged me, by God; he has gained twenty-four hours' march on me." - The Duke of Wellington when informed of Napoléon's army marching into Belgium

On the morrow, we'll look at the tactical picture presented to the Armée du Nord and its commanders.

Bataille d'Iéna. 14 octobre 1806
Horace Vernet (PD)

À bientôt!

Author's Note: I note that today is Bastille Day, or as the French call it, La Fête Nationale. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that. My French ancestors would be spinning in their graves if I forgot ...