Waterloo. Point of no return


Ney's attack near Waterloo. Hood. A.-F. E. Filippoto


12 failures by Napoleon Bonaparte. With each of his next defeats, Napoleon himself left himself less and less chances of a rebirth. Or, if you like, to return. Up to 100 days, it was usually the French emperor who rejected any proposals for a decent peace, considering them unworthy.

In 1815, everything was different, Napoleon really longed for peace. More than this, he wanted only one thing - a meeting with his son, but Maria Louise was not the last of those who betrayed him. The allies did not want to hear about peace with Napoleonic France, Petersburg and London were especially militant.

Waterloo. Point of no return
Duke of Wellington

The British, having dealt with Spanish problems, for the first time during the Napoleonic Wars put up an army near the northern borders of France. At its head stood the Duke of Wellington, who fought for several years in the Pyrenees, where he managed to defeat many Napoleon's marshals. With the emperor himself, fate bred him, but it seems, only in order to reduce in the last battle.

No guilty guilty


Napoleon's return took place just a year after the abdication. It is rather strange that after 100 days France was again imposed by the Bourbons, who managed to discredit themselves as much as possible. It was no coincidence that it was said about them: "They have not forgotten anything and have not learned anything."

Objectively, for a while, everything was in Napoleon's favor. And as it was always in his life, when a chance appeared, Napoleon was not slow to take advantage of it. For three months he was even spared the need to make excuses for failures, correcting the truth.


Napoleon near Waterloo. Hood. V. Kossak

But the emperor’s habit almost turned into a mania, especially when preparing the famous “Bulletins” for the public. After each new failure, he certainly turned out to be more and more objective reasons for justification and more and more guilty.

The spring of 1815 is a completely different matter. Instead, to mislead the public became a royalist, as, indeed, the rest of the press. Suffice it to recall how she painted Napoleon's bloodless march from the Cote d'Azur to Paris. “A Corsican monster has landed in the bay of João,” “The usurper has entered Grenoble,” “Bonaparte has occupied Lyon,” “Napoleon is approaching Fontainebleau,” and finally, “His Imperial Majesty enters Paris faithful to him.”

When the emperor led his revived regiments against Blucher and Wellington, he himself, judging by all indications, had no doubt that he would be able to solve the matter in two three battles, and not necessarily general ones. The way the French finished Blucher under Linyi made such expectations fully justified.


If Marshal Ney, who only had to withstand Katr-Bra against the advancing vanguards of Wellington’s army, didn’t return d'Erlon’s corps to battle, allowing him to hit Blucher's rear, the defeat would be complete. Even the success of the British against Ney then could not change anything. Under Waterloo Wellington, most likely, he simply would not have fought.

Another thing is that the campaign of 1815 in any case could not end successfully for Napoleon, but he would be able to win for some time. Perhaps in Vienna someone became a little more accommodating, although it is very difficult to believe that Alexander I would refuse to continue the struggle. By the way, England would definitely not add up weapons.


Vienna Congress. It’s easy to find both Talleyrand and Metternich on classical engraving.

Of course, one cannot ignore the fact that the army, which opposed the British and Prussians in June 1815, was much more experienced and professional than the one with which Napoleon surprised the world in the last French campaign. But this does not in the least prevent thousands of historians from stubbornly continuing to investigate the mistakes of Marshals Pear and Ney, Napoleon himself after Linyi.

Meanwhile, the outcome of the short campaign not in favor of the French was finally decided just in the very first battle of the campaign - at Linyi. Ney returned his first corps from there, which allowed Blucher to withdraw the backbone of the Prussian army from under the persecution. Winning at Linyi, Napoleon threw Blucher away from the Anglo-Dutch ally by more than five leagues (almost 30 kilometers).

Even the victorious army, in those days, it would take more than a day to overcome such a distance, and the Prussians were pretty beaten by Linyi. However, Blucher, not by any means beautiful eyes, who received the nickname from the soldiers, Marshal “Forward” (Vorwärts), repeated to them again and again: “What we lose on the march cannot be returned to the battlefield”.


By country roads, the Prussians reached Wavre - just a half-way from Wellington's position. And the victorious corps of Pear and Gerard, after they received news that Bullov and Tilman were joining Blucher, rushed to Gembloux. There they were from the main forces of Napoleon at a distance twice as large as the Prussians from Wellington. And this was the result of blindly following the emperor’s order to keep up with Blucher.

Even the guard is dying


From Linyi Napoleon, detaching Pears after Blucher, moved his main forces against the Anglo-Dutch army. To the plateau of Mont Saint-Jean, where the 70th army of Wellington, the corps of Rayle and d'Erlon, the cavalry and guard of Napoleon, along with the joined corps of Ney, were located only in the evening of June 17.

In the distance, the enemy’s positions, mostly hidden behind densely overgrown shrubs, slowly sank fog. French artillery pulled itself almost until dawn. The Napoleonic army, pretty battered under Linyi, was already quite a bit superior to the strength of the British and Dutch, numbering about 72 thousand people.


Napoleon's march from Linyi to Waterloo

Most likely, those researchers are right who believe that Pears could be sent to pursue with much less forces than 33 thousand - almost a third of the army. But Napoleon himself felt that he had not finished off Blucher, and was too afraid that the old Prussian would abandon Wellington and would prefer easier prey. The experience of the last campaign convinced the emperor precisely in this. Moreover, the units of Bullov and Tillmann were about to join Blucher.

So, on the morning of June 18, the two armies were facing each other, but the commanders were in no hurry to start the battle, waiting for reinforcements. Napoleon hoped that Pears would be able to push Blucher back, but he did not take into account the fact that the path of the Prussians was much shorter, and his new marshal too literally took the order to pursue.

The old Prussian outwitted the French, and they did not even prevent him from connecting with the reinforcements who had approached. Wellington also had the right to expect support from the Prussians, despite the blow that the French inflicted upon them under Linyi.


The Battle of Linyi

Obviously, the duke would have avoided the battle altogether if Blucher himself had not assured him that he would manage to bring at least half of his army to the field of Waterloo. And under his command, as it turned out after calculating the losses at Linyi, there were at least 80 thousand, although not all of them were ready to fight again.

The very course of the Battle of Waterloo has been studied as thoroughly as possible, and more than once described on the pages of the Military Review (Waterloo How Napoleon's Empire Perished) In Russia, the presentation of events by the great Eugene Tarle in his textbook work Napoleon is rightly considered classic. To him for a start and turn.

“Already at the end of the night, Napoleon was there, but he could not start the attack at dawn, because the rain had loosened the ground so much that it was difficult to deploy the cavalry. The emperor drove around his troops in the morning and was delighted with the reception given to him: it was a very exceptional burst of mass enthusiasm, not seen in such proportions since Austerlitz. This review, which was destined to be the last review of the army in the life of Napoleon, made an indelible impression on him and all those present.

Napoleon’s headquarters was first at the farm du Caille. At 11 1/2 o’clock in the morning Napoleon thought that the soil had dried sufficiently, and only then he ordered the battle to begin. A strong artillery fire of 84 guns was opened against the left wing of the British and an attack was launched under the leadership of Ney. At the same time, the French launched a weaker attack with the aim of demonstrating at Ugumon Castle on the right flank of the English army, where the attack met the most energetic rebuff and came across a fortified position.

The attack on the left wing of the British continued. The killing struggle went on for an hour and a half, when Napoleon noticed in a very great distance in the north-east near Saint-Lambert the obscure outlines of the moving troops. At first he thought it was Pear, which from the night and then several times during the morning was ordered to rush to the battlefield.

But it was not Pear, but Blucher, who had escaped the pursuit of Pear and, after very skillfully executed transitions, had deceived the French Marshal, and now he was in a hurry to help Wellington. Napoleon, learning the truth, still was not embarrassed; he was convinced that Pears were on the heels behind Blucher and that when both of them would arrive at the battlefield, although Blucher would bring Wellington more reinforcements than Pears would bring to the emperor, but all the same the forces would more or less balance, and if before the appearance of Blucher and "He will manage to deliver a punch to the British with a crushing blow, then the battle after the approach of Pear will be finally won."


What Pears have done ...


Here we invite the reader to make the first small digression. And we ask ourselves: why did Napoleon himself, and after him and the many creators of the Napoleonic legend, generally need to blame almost all the blame for Waterloo on Marshal Pear?


E. Pears - the last of Napoleon's 26 marshals

After all, even a victory would not have given the emperor and France anything but the continuation of a new war, worse than the one that a year earlier ended with the fall of Paris and the abdication of Napoleon. Pears himself between Linyi and Waterloo only confirmed the fact that he was absolutely not capable of independent command.

The fact that he missed Blucher was not a terrible tragedy yet, the Pear regiments, by the way, even managed to hook Tilman’s detachment on the right bank of the river. Deal. The main forces of the Prussians did not become distracted by the blow, which seemed to threaten their rear and were in a hurry to help Wellington. Even if Schwarzenberg had been in his place, which Blucher simply could not stand, the field marshal would still drive his soldiers into battle.

The resilience of Wellington’s soldiers and Blucher’s iron will, and not Napoleon’s miscalculations and marshal’s mistakes at all, became the main factors in the Allied victory in the last battle. but also necessary.


The Battle of Waterloo

We only note that the last of Napoleon’s defeats made his legend more than any other. And much more. But it is precisely in his last defeat that the emperor is simply obliged to be guilty of the least. Otherwise, why then do you need a Napoleonic legend. And it doesn’t matter if this is really so.

We continue to quote the famous book of E. Tarle.

“Having directed part of the cavalry against Blucher, Napoleon ordered Marshal Ney to continue the attack of the left wing and the center of the British, which had already experienced a number of terrible blows from the beginning of the battle. Here the four divisions of d'Erlon’s corps advanced in tight combat formation. A bloody battle broke out on this whole front. The British met with fire these massive columns and several times went into a counterattack. The French divisions entered battle one after another and suffered terrible losses. The Scottish cavalry cut into these divisions and cut down part of the composition. Noticing the dump and the defeat of the division, Napoleon personally rushed to the height near the Belle Alliance farm, sent several thousand cuirassiers of General Millot there, and the Scots, having lost an entire regiment, were driven back.

This attack upset almost the entire body of d'Erlon. The left wing of the English army could not be broken. Then Napoleon changes his plan and transfers the main blow to the center and the right wing of the English army. At 3 1/2 hours, La Haut Saint Farm was taken by the left-flank division of d'Erlon Corps. But this corps did not have the strength to develop success. Then Napoleon gives Her 40 squadrons of cavalry Millot and Lefebvre-Denuett with the task of striking the right wing of the British between the castle Ugumon and La Hain Saint. Ugumon Castle was finally taken at this time, but the British held on, falling hundreds and hundreds and not retreating from their main positions.

During this famous attack, the French cavalry came under fire from the English infantry and artillery. But this did not bother the rest. There was a time when Wellington thought that everything was lost - and this was not only thought, but also spoken at his headquarters. The English commander betrayed his mood with the words with which he replied to the report on the impossibility of the British troops to keep known points: “Let them all die in this case! I no longer have reinforcements. Let them die to the last man, but we must hold out until Blucher arrives, "Wellington answered all the alarmed reports of his generals, throwing their last reserves into battle."


And where did Her mistake


Ney's attack is the second reason to slow down in citation. And the emperor’s second personal mistake, which he himself at first, and then the devoted historians together attributed to the marshal. However, this marshal did not grow old and lost either ardor and energy, or skill in establishing interaction between the armed forces.


M. Ney - Marshal, recognized as the bravest of the brave

This Napoleon, with each of his subsequent campaigns, acted more and more according to the pattern, preferring straightforward massive attacks. Although the army of 1815, may readers forgive the repetition, was much more experienced and hardened than the last scripts of the campaign. By the way, they themselves managed to become real professional warriors. But, perhaps, the main thing is that Napoleon at Waterloo had a very bad situation with artillery, and Marshal Ney absolutely had nothing to do with it.

No, most French gunners were also masters of their craft, it was bad that the emperor now had too few guns, and the guns were not the best. Several dozen of the best French either lost under Linyi, or simply did not have time to pull Mont-Saint-Jean to the plateau.


Well, even Napoleon was let down by damned dirt, because of which he lost the opportunity to maneuver the batteries, focusing fire at the main points. So, as he brilliantly did it under Wagram, Borodin and Dresden. The shortage of guns could be compensated by infantry columns. And it was not for nothing that Academician Tarle noted that "Napoleon did not expect infantry reserves."

The Emperor

“Sent another cavalry into the fire, 37 squadrons of Kellerman. Evening came. Napoleon finally sent his guard to the British and himself sent it to attack. And at that very moment there were screams and a roar of shots on the right flank of the French army: Blucher with 30 thousand soldiers arrived on the battlefield. But the guard’s attacks continue. since Napoleon believes that Pears follow Blucher!

Soon, however, panic spread: the Prussian cavalry fell upon the French guard, who was caught between two fires, and Blucher himself rushed with the rest of his strength to the Belle Alliance farm, from where Napoleon had come forward with the guard. Blucher, with this maneuver, wanted to cut off Napoleon's retreat. It was already eight o’clock in the evening, but still light enough, and then Wellington, who had been standing all day under continuous murderous attacks by the French, went on a general offensive. But Pears did not come. Until the last minute, Napoleon waited in vain. "


Everything is over


Let's make the last, very short digression. The turning point passed long before the Prussians approached, and, as many military historians believe, Napoleon had to stop the battle without even throwing the guard into the fire.

E. Tarle wrote:

“It was all over. The guard, having built in a square, slowly retreated, desperately defending itself, through the close ranks of the enemy. Napoleon rode in the midst of the guard grenadier guard battalion. The desperate resistance of the old guard delayed the winners ”



Wellington at Waterloo, thin. V. Pienemann


“Brave French, give up!” Shouted the English Colonel Helkett, driving up to the square surrounded on all sides by the commander General Cambronn, but the guards did not weaken the resistance, preferring death to surrender. At the suggestion of surrender, Cambronn shouted a contemptuous curse at the English.

In other areas, the French troops, and especially Plansenoy, where the reserve was fighting — the Duke Lobau’s corps — resisted, but in the end, being attacked by the fresh forces of the Prussians, they dispersed in different directions, fleeing, and only the next day, and it was only partially begun to assemble in organized units. The Prussians pursued the enemy all night long distances. ”

On the battlefield, the French lost a little more than the British, Dutch and Prussians - about 25 thousand against 23 thousand among the allies. But after Waterloo, losses in retreat were very terrible, which is rare for Napoleonic troops. And it’s not so important that Blucher insisted that the “Golden Bridges” should not be built on the enemy, and mercilessly persecuted the French.


The meeting of Wellington and Blucher after the Battle of Waterloo

More important is the collapse of the Napoleonic army itself, we recall again, much more experienced and combat-ready than in 1814. The same Pears, which Napoleon, more precisely, his apologists later made a scapegoat, with great difficulty pulled out his divisions and part of the defeated army from the blows of the enemy, for which, incidentally, he received praise from the emperor.

It seems that the emperor himself understood that he was to blame for the defeat much more than Pears. Otherwise, why in his memoirs does the Pear transition from Namur to Paris - after Waterloo, be called "one of the most brilliant exploits of the war of 1815."

Napoleon in Saint Helena admitted to Las Casas:

“I already thought that Pears with his forty thousand soldiers were lost for me, and I could not join them to my army beyond Valenciennes and Bushen, relying on the northern fortresses. I could organize a defense system there and defend every inch of the earth. ”

He could, but did not. Apparently, Napoleon was disappointed not only on the battlefield near Waterloo, but also after it. And it’s not at all because not only all of Europe was again opposing him, pushing thousands of armies to the French border, but also his own wife.

The army remained, but after Waterloo he did not have an army that would win. To repeat the 1793rd or 1814th with real chances of success has become, by all indications, already impossible. And historians will decide for a long time who betrayed whom after Waterloo: Napoleon's France or Napoleon's France after all.

The famous contemporary publicist Alexander Nikonov said about the French emperor: "He wanted peace so badly that he constantly fought." In 1815, Napoleon was allowed to stay in the world or with the world for less than 100 days.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

41 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. 1959ain 30 January 2020 08: 01 New
    • 1
    • 8
    -7
    He was let down by hemorrhoids and health, that's why he started the battle so late, and mediocre helpers
    1. alma 30 January 2020 08: 07 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      And why be surprised if he washed four times in his life?
      1. Glory1974 30 January 2020 10: 34 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        if he washed four times in his life?

        Moreover, he demanded this from his wife.
        He wrote to her in a letter: "Josephine, do not wash, I'm going!"
  2. Olgovich 30 January 2020 08: 11 New
    • 11
    • 5
    +6
    an army against the British and Prussians in June 1815, was much more experienced and professionalthan the one with which Napoleon surprised myrrh in a past, French campaign.

    Strange: what has changed in her per year? Where did she manage to gain experience and professionalism this year? recourse

    А Pears did not come. Until the last minute Napoleon waiting for him in vain. "

    "Where is Wenk ?! Where is the army of Wenk?" Hitler, Berlin April 1945.

    It's already over, but they still think that everything can be changed ...
  3. Viktor Sergeev 30 January 2020 08: 14 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Yes, the French lost so rarely during retreats, especially in Russia. Well, what kind of Napoleon had a more experienced army, made up of youths? All experienced were destroyed in the battles of 1812 - 1814.
    1. podymych 30 January 2020 09: 24 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      A very significant part of the army near Waterloo were veterans of Spanish companies
  4. wolf20032 30 January 2020 08: 24 New
    • 9
    • 1
    +8
    Quote: Olgovich
    Strange: what has changed in it over the year? Where did she manage to gain experience and professionalism this year? recourse

    The prisoners. The prisoners of the Great Army were released. And they could not do anything but war. And when the Emperor returned, they certainly went to the army again.
  5. wolf20032 30 January 2020 08: 31 New
    • 2
    • 11
    -9
    To quote Tarle, in the story of Waterloo, is the same as the newspaper Pravda. Very superficial. She was tasked not to hold on to, but to capture Katr - Bra, which he never did. Well, a wonderful phrase that the course of the battle is described many times. Thus, the author escapes the need to tell at least something himself, hiding behind Tarle's fantasies?
    1. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 36 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      “To quote Tarle, in the story of Waterloo, is the same as the newspaper Pravda,” it is true. Better than Sharras, I have not seen anything.
  6. Prometey 30 January 2020 09: 18 New
    • 8
    • 1
    +7
    Of the works of art, I like the story of S. Zweig “Mig Waterloo” - it is very dramatic and interesting about the last battle of Napoleon.
    Under Waterloo, the British were among the first to use massive fire of rifle chains in several rows, literally mowing the dense columns of the French guard. They did not pay much attention to this episode, but the same red uniforms showed that the bullet was no longer a fool, and the bayonet was far from good and began to develop tactics of distance combat, one of the first in Europe to rearm infantry with rifled long-range weapons. After 40 years, the Russian army in Crimea completely experienced the consequences.
    1. Glory1974 30 January 2020 10: 27 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Under Waterloo, the British were among the first to use massive fire of rifle chains in several rows.

      began to develop tactics of distance combat, one of the first in Europe to rearm the infantry with long-range rifled weapons.

      I absolutely agree with you.
      Here is an analysis of the battle from a military man! Not hemorrhoids and a runny nose let Napoleon down. Not a professional and experienced army of veterans.
      The point is technical and tactical superiority.
      For some reason, historians bypass this fact.
    2. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      “The British were among the first to use massive fire of rifle chains in several rows” - the linear tactics of the 18th century are based precisely on the maximum effect of rifle fire of deployed ranks. At the beginning of the Revolutionary Wars, the French, having poorly trained troops, used the tactics of infantry convoys (in fact, the convoys were the same lines but 5-10 lines deep) which allowed them to break through the thin lines of their opponents, neglecting losses from gunfire.
      1. Operator 30 January 2020 15: 33 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        In the Battle of Waterloo, the British and Dutch deployed in line under the protection of buildings and structures, and the French marched in columns to storm the open field.
        1. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 38 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          You are not aware of the progress of the battle.
        2. Prometey 30 January 2020 18: 59 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Operator
          In the Battle of Waterloo, the British and Dutch deployed in line under the protection of buildings and structures, and the French marched in columns to storm the open field.

          Is it like the British still practiced in Spain?
          1. Operator 30 January 2020 19: 09 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            As for Spain and Portugal, I do not know, but it is quite possible, since the British had local irregular formations there as allies.
      2. Prometey 30 January 2020 18: 57 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Sergey Valov
        “The British were among the first to use massive fire of rifle chains in several rows” - the linear tactics of the 18th century are based precisely on the maximum effect of rifle fire of deployed ranks.

        Yes, but the linear tactics of the 18th century meant precisely the ranks in which the first 2 ranks fired, as a rule, and not rifle chains in several rows.
        Yes, it was an episode, but which later had an impact on the development of military tactics.
        1. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 23: 11 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Rifle chains in droves began to be used by the French during the revolutionary wars. This was made possible thanks to the high motivation of the soldiers and their gradual training. The British did not use rifle chains in Napoleonic times (including at Waterloo). And most importantly, the effect of the volley fire of the infantry unit at that time far exceeded the same effect of the single firing of the same number of soldiers. It is the effect, not the effectiveness. For the volley of the enemy and the simultaneous defeat of a large number of comrades walking nearby, produces a much more frightening effect than individual shots and from time to time falling neighbors in the ranks. This is what caused the linear tactics of the 18th century.
          But the rifle chains in several rows, this is something new, hitherto unknown to me.
          And third, do not learn history from films, for example, Waterloo and the War and the Peace of Bondarchuk in the sense of military historicism is a rare Mr.
          1. Prometey 31 January 2020 08: 35 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Sergey Valov
            Rifle chains in droves began to be used by the French during the revolutionary wars.

            But somehow, under Waterloo, this was not. They pushed in columns and suffered heavy losses.
            As for historical films - always smiles when advised not to watch them. Naturally, there is a lot of fiction. But about Waterloo I do not agree - quite a solid film. And in general, historically sustained. Such now do not put.
            PS I did not minus you. Perhaps even a plus.
            1. Sergey Valov 31 January 2020 09: 05 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              The tactics of the French army under Napoleon underwent changes. The number of people increased, losses increased, the quality of training decreased. Napoleon gradually moved, as you rightly noted, to the use of troops by huge masses, the attack of d'Erlon is a typical example. The strength of such shock masses is crushing, but the opposite is also catastrophic in case of failure.
              As for the Waterloo movie, I’ll say one thing - the film is spectacular, individual episodes are magnificent, but the battle is shown very crumpled, unrealistic. Actually, he was different. One appearance of the Prussians at the end of the battle is worth it. Analysis of it is a separate issue.
              As for the pros / cons, of course thanks, but I don't give a damn about them.
              1. Prometey 31 January 2020 09: 43 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Sergey Valov
                As for the Waterloo movie, I’ll say one thing - the film is spectacular, individual episodes are magnificent, but the battle is shown very crumpled, unrealistic. Actually, he was different. One appearance of the Prussians at the end of the battle is worth it. Analysis of it is a separate issue.

                This is the director’s vision. Of course, the scenes are crumpled there, individual episodes are shown. Sometimes between them the connection is broken. Although the exit from the Prussian forest is quite effective, it is again episodic.
                1. Sergey Valov 31 January 2020 15: 57 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  “This is the director’s vision” is rather his qualification.
  7. Hazarov 30 January 2020 09: 40 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    The author forgot to talk about the crunch of French rolls because of which all the wars of revolutionary France happened!
  8. apro 30 January 2020 09: 41 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The last flap of an eagle's wing ...
    Victory or defeat could not change anything. Nobody wanted peace with Napoleon. Yes, and by and large he couldn’t offer feudal emperors. A game of contradictions? Not a fact ..
  9. Operator 30 January 2020 11: 56 New
    • 10
    • 1
    +9
    The transition in 1815 to the side of the former emperor (abdicated in 1814) of a significant part of the French army was associated with large-scale terror, which was arranged by the royalists who arrived from exile, against Bonaparte's supporters, during which up to 100 thousand people (including members Bonapartist families).

    The loss of the French at Waterloo was associated with four things:
    - the equality of forces at the beginning of the battle and the double superiority of the British, Dutch and Germans at the end of the battle;
    - the defensive tactics of the British and Dutch in pre-fortified positions with the deployment of riflemen on the front;
    - The obsolete offensive tactics of the French in the form of battalion columns, which did not allow the production of full-fledged volleys from small arms;
    - soggy soil, which did not allow the French to use corporate maneuver field artillery.
    1. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 34 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      “Connected with the large-scale terror that the royalists, who came from exile, arranged against the supporters of Bonaparte, during which up to 100 thousand people were killed” - there wasn’t any terror during the first restoration. The persecution was, and even insignificant, terror - no. They didn’t even touch the army, the regiments didn’t disband, which, then, helped Napoleon hard. Serious persecution of the killings was during the second restoration.
      1. Operator 30 January 2020 15: 39 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        They didn’t cut out military personnel, but civilians dismissed from the army, sympathizing with Napoleon from among the townspeople and especially from the countryside, who received land allotments as a result of the expropriation of the property of aristocrats.

        In VO, if I’m not mistaken, there was a historical article about a republican general who came into conflict with the authorities under Napoleon, who was imprisoned in the island and released from it in 1814 as a political judge - after arriving in Marseille he was horrified by the royalist blood flow in the city streets from the massacre the townspeople.
    2. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 35 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      "Cut to 100 thousand people" - tales for amateurs
  10. wolf20032 30 January 2020 12: 52 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: Prometey
    Under Waterloo, the British were among the first to use massive fire of rifle chains in several rows, literally mowing the dense columns of the French guard. They did not pay much attention to this episode, but the same red uniforms showed that the bullet was no longer a fool, and the bayonet was far from good and began to develop tactics of distance combat, one of the first in Europe to rearm infantry with rifled long-range weapons.

    This first happened not at Waterloo, a little earlier. The failure of the Guard is not associated with dense rifled fire by the numerous chains of English riflemen. Of the 9 battalions of the Guard, 7 went on the attack. Of these, 2 remained to cover the flank opposite Gyugomon, 2 remained near the headquarters. Thus, 5 battalions took part directly in the attack. Against almost everything that remained combat-ready at Wellington. Even in this situation, the Guards had a chance to break through the British lines, but at that moment when the Guard came under heavy fire, its commanders tried to fire a return volley, for which it was necessary to change lines, but it was impossible to stop under fire, it was necessary to move forward and walk to the bayonets. But they stopped and lost. They began to retreat, but only in order to rebuild, but from the outside it seemed that the Guard was retreating. And this famous one sounded - the Guard is retreating !! And the army trembled. It’s not a rifle weapon. And not in the numerous chains of English shooters. Only 5 battalions attacked, this is the problem. But even 5 battalions had a chance of success.
    1. podymych 30 January 2020 13: 51 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      5 battalions, but what! After all, it was from them that the famous went: "God is always on the side of large battalions"
      1. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 15: 22 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        “After all, it was from them that the famous went:“ God is always on the side of large battalions ”- this expression appeared 200 years earlier.
        1. BAI
          BAI 30 January 2020 18: 34 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          More precisely, something like this:
          Mistakenly attributed to Napoleon.
          The words of the French marshal of the XVII century. Jacques d \ 'Engamp by Ferte.
          But its popularity is due to King Frederick II the Great (1712-1786), who often repeated these words. According to tradition, everything said by the king was carefully recorded by court historians, and therefore these words later became widely known.

          These words were originally recorded in 1740:
          Anna of Austria, regent of the kingdom, having learned that the enemies who had prepared to fight us during the infancy of Louis XIV outnumber our army, said: "God will stand on the side of the justice of our armed struggle." “By the body of the Lord!” Marshal de la Ferte swore to her, “as far as I have seen, God is always on the side of large battalions!” - François Gayot de Pitaval. Saillies d'esprit, ou choix curieux de traits utiles et agréables pour la conversations ... Paris, 1740. P.63),
          1. podymych 30 January 2020 21: 09 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            All this is indisputable, in the world there is nothing new.
            However, regularly, as a saying goes, Boni began to apply it ...
          2. denplot 30 January 2020 21: 44 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            God is on the side of the battalions that shoot better!
          3. Sergey Valov 30 January 2020 23: 13 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            It may very well be.
    2. Prometey 30 January 2020 19: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: wolf20032
      But they stopped and lost. They began to retreat, but only in order to rebuild, but from the outside it seemed that the Guard was retreating.

      The guardsmen were suppressed by the fire and losses from the fire of the English infantry. One way or another, but the first salvo knocked out at least 300 people. The British by that time were also pretty battered. But the French attacked in the old fashioned way, with a dense mass, slowly walking through the mud. There was no sin to miss. Damn, something reminiscent of the medieval battle of Eisencourt.
  11. sevtrash 30 January 2020 19: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The brilliant commander of all times and nations lost to Waterloo and his universe much earlier than June 1815, possibly when he became more military in politics than politician.
  12. wolf20032 31 January 2020 08: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Prometey
    Quote: wolf20032
    But they stopped and lost. They began to retreat, but only in order to rebuild, but from the outside it seemed that the Guard was retreating.

    The guardsmen were suppressed by the fire and losses from the fire of the English infantry. One way or another, but the first salvo knocked out at least 300 people. The British by that time were also pretty battered. But the French attacked in the old fashioned way, with a dense mass, slowly walking through the mud. There was no sin to miss. Damn, something reminiscent of the medieval battle of Eisencourt.

    The guard attacked as prescribed by the statutes and orders of the commanders. Some battalions were in columns, some were led by a ledge, built in a square. It must be remembered that 5 attacking battalions, this is the so-called. "middle guard." How many soldiers were put out of action by the first salvo is an assumption at Tarle level. There is still debate about whether Cambronn shouted a famous phrase, or limited himself to one word. And to count the number of dead and wounded after the first salvo of the British, this is bad manners. This is unknown and will never be known, one can only speculate. We have a fact - 5 battalions took part directly in the attack and they achieved some success. If it were not for the stop after the volley of the English, they would have knocked over the English center, and the battle itself would have ended in a draw, meaning Blucher who had approached. The Emperor would simply have no time left for him. It was evening. But in the morning he would have been waiting for a sad end. On the one hand, the Emperor, from the rear of the Pear. The fate of Europe would go the other way. But everything happened as it happened, heaven rebelled. However, this is a completely different story, everything about it from Hugo.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Sergey Valov 31 January 2020 16: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      “They would have overturned the English center, and the battle would have ended in a draw” - the maximum that they were capable of is to throw away the opposing English infantry by several hundred meters. If they had moved on, they would have been surrounded. And then everything would be as it was.
  13. wolf20032 3 February 2020 10: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Sergey Valov
    “They would have overturned the English center, and the battle would have ended in a draw” - the maximum that they were capable of is to throw away the opposing English infantry by several hundred meters. If they had moved on, they would have been surrounded. And then everything would be as it was.

    There was no one to surround. Some parts of Wellington’s army had reached Brussels by then. The 5 Guard battalions were confronted by the remnants of Wellington's combat-ready units. We remember that the Great Army would not flinch and did not run, having seen the retreat of the Middle Guard, we will not forget about the two battalions of the old Guard at Guygomon. There was someone to support the offensive.
  14. ermak124.0 April 2 2020 11: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Magazines, there is no point of no return. There is none !!!! .. There is a return line (RV) or a return point, if it is a non-reference area.