Victory at Waterloo

[stevep]

On the question of further recruits from Belgium or elsewhere. I think Napoleon relies on volunteers for the Waterloo campaign because he dare not re-impose conscription, which was deeply unpopular. This partly explained the performance of his troops in the campaign as they were highly motivated but, given the heavy losses he too I don't think he could replace losses. As such, even if nothing else he would be attrictioned away as in 1814. Given the actual performance he and several of his marshals showed during the campaign a series defeat might still well have occurred and the army itself become demoralised.

As said the only really likely impact would be a weaker France, as the peace is stricter than historical, and less influence for Britain without the prestige Wellington gained from the victory historically.

Possibly also Belgium might be transferred to another power, say Prussia, as the Dutch had been demonstrated to be insufficiently strong to safeguard the region.

Steve

 

[Typo]

Gentlemen!

Please take a look at Grimm Reaper's excellent post again, and see what tiny part Wellington's troops took up and why Austria remained the dominant power on the continent for decades yet. From this also follows how insignificant even a crushing French victory over Wellington would have been - apart from the entirely diiferent view we would have on said wars today!

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Disagree, the congress of Vienna would have had much less British influence since they weren't the ones to 'defeat" Napoleon.

 

[Big Tex]

So what do the borders of Europe become with the British having lost the majority of their influence with Wellington dead and their army failed?

Austria and Russia and possibly Prussia (depends a little on Waterloo and what other Prussian forces do) get to throw their weight around in Vienna, but what does this do to borders.

Does France lose territories? Any special stipulations?
What happens to Belgium?
What happens elsewhere?
What is the world's opinion of Great Britain?

 

[67th Tigers]

On the question of further recruits from Belgium or elsewhere. I think Napoleon relies on volunteers for the Waterloo campaign because he dare not re-impose conscription, which was deeply unpopular.

He had reimposed conscription, and had called out the missing Class of 1814, as well as the Class of 1815. He had the best part of half a million men in the early stages of training, and was hoping to hold of the allies long enough that he could get them to the field.

 

[Zyzzyva]

France is screwed, in other words. Is their no way Napoleon could escape that?

Nope. The allies are going to drop the hammer on Napoleon this time round. There's only so much one man can do.

 

[fhaessig]

Doubtful to say the least. Prussia wanted Napoleon dead, Britain was funding as much as it had done before, Austria and Russia were on the horizon with massive Armies. No one wanted Napoleon back in power and as we saw from Napoleon's own campaign in 1815, I doubt that he still had the skills needed to see off this threat.

If the Prussian army is Thouroughly crushed, then Prussia is definitely out of the equation and what it want doesn't count.

The question is England. For all parliament knows, the Ogre is back and Uk is looking to foot the bill for the european powers and the Bourbons for another score years. Add to that the misrepresentations by the government and the government may well fall. If that happens, then no more money to fund coalitions.

Then it's up to Austria and Russia; Both had huge armies, but there were problems in briging that weight to bear.

Russia's armies were several month away at least and there was a BIG command problem, as the CiC, MacDonald, was despised by his russian officers as a foreigner. So the Russians armies will take a long time to come; For the present, Austria is alone. And while it has a superiority in nimbers, that superiority is slight. Also, like France, the Austrian army is the last army of the Habsburg, for the time being. If it is crushed, the Empire will tear apart. So AUstria is much more likely to negiciate, as it has a trump card with the prince of Rome.

At that point, Alexander won't come in without allies.

So it really hangs on the british parliament. If the government falls, there's a big chance that Napoleon will keep power in France ( with 1802 borders ). If it doesn't, it's likely Napoleon will be crushed by the Austrian, Russian and British armies.

 

[Zyzzyva]

If the Prussian army is Thouroughly crushed, then Prussia is definitely out of the equation and what it want doesn't count.

The question is England. For all parliament knows, the Ogre is back and Uk is looking to foot the bill for the european powers and the Bourbons for another score years. Add to that the misrepresentations by the government and the government may well fall. If that happens, then no more money to fund coalitions.

Then it's up to Austria and Russia; Both had huge armies, but there were problems in briging that weight to bear.

Russia's armies were several month away at least and there was a BIG command problem, as the CiC, MacDonald, was despised by his russian officers as a foreigner. So the Russians armies will take a long time to come; For the present, Austria is alone. And while it has a superiority in nimbers, that superiority is slight. Also, like France, the Austrian army is the last army of the Habsburg, for the time being. If it is crushed, the Empire will tear apart. So AUstria is much more likely to negiciate, as it has a trump card with the prince of Rome.

At that point, Alexander won't come in without allies.

So it really hangs on the british parliament. If the government falls, there's a big chance that Napoleon will keep power in France ( with 1802 borders ). If it doesn't, it's likely Napoleon will be crushed by the Austrian, Russian and British armies.

a) Blucher's army wasn't the whole of the Prussian army; and if there's one thing the Napoleonic wars show, its the ability of a state to keep raising armies year after year after year.
b) I think you're underestimating the resolution of the allies to crush Napoleon underfoot. By 1815 he was going down. The seventh coalition was going to grind Napoleon into the dirt if it took them another ten years to do (which it wouldn't; there was a reason Napoleon lost in the 1813-14 campaigns).

 

[67th Tigers]

a) Blucher's army wasn't the whole of the Prussian army; and if there's one thing the Napoleonic wars show, its the ability of a state to keep raising armies year after year after year.
b) I think you're underestimating the resolution of the allies to crush Napoleon underfoot. By 1815 he was going down. The seventh coalition was going to grind Napoleon into the dirt if it took them another ten years to do (which it wouldn't; there was a reason Napoleon lost in the 1813-14 campaigns).

a. It was the only part worth a damn, and even then it was pretty dodgy. 5th and 6th Army Corps are absolutely useless, not even having a skeleton of reliable troops.

 

[fhaessig]

b) I think you're underestimating the resolution of the allies to crush Napoleon underfoot. By 1815 he was going down. The seventh coalition was going to grind Napoleon into the dirt if it took them another ten years to do (which it wouldn't; there was a reason Napoleon lost in the 1813-14 campaigns).

ARe you so sure that, with Prussia and Uk out of the war, and no chances of timely help byy Russian armies, Austria will not try to get an arrengement with Napoleon? Especially knowing that if their main army is crushed, the empire will cease to exist?

 

[Grimm Reaper]

There is also the marriage ties between Napoleon and Austria.



Could have sworn I mentioned that the other Prussian corps were of extremely dubious value...

 

[danwild6]

Does anyone know the chances of the British government falling after a Napoleonic victory at Waterloo? I mean, would it have been the worst defeat that British arms had ever suffered on the continent?

 

[Fellatio Nelson]

Does anyone know the chances of the British government falling after a Napoleonic victory at Waterloo? I mean, would it have been the worst defeat that British arms had ever suffered on the continent?

I recall Wellington had stationed a lot of troops - including good ones - along his escape route to the sea, and kept a cavalry reserve on the field in case he had to withdraw, and naturally had naval dominance, so I don't believe we'd have lost our entire army.

 

[DAv]

ARe you so sure that, with Prussia and Uk out of the war, and no chances of timely help byy Russian armies, Austria will not try to get an arrengement with Napoleon? Especially knowing that if their main army is crushed, the empire will cease to exist?

Britain wasn't out by a long shot. If defeated at Waterloo, Wellington had made preperations to evacuate from the Continent. The British Army would have been damaged, but not destroyed.

 

[67th Tigers]

Britain wasn't out by a long shot. If defeated at Waterloo, Wellington had made preperations to evacuate from the Continent. The British Army would have been damaged, but not destroyed.

Wellington had only around 10% of the British Army with him (contrasted to Blucher, who had more than half the Prussian Army, and most of the troops worth a damn). 13 of Wellington's infantry battalions were constituent units of Graham's Army of the Low Countries which remained in the Netherlands.

In fact, the bulk of the force that was the Army of the Low Countries was under orders for America in 1814, but that's a different matter....

 

[fhaessig]

Britain wasn't out by a long shot. If defeated at Waterloo, Wellington had made preperations to evacuate from the Continent. The British Army would have been damaged, but not destroyed.

Please read my previous posts. The point is that Napoleon has a chance is the prussian army is desroyed as a fighting force AND if the victory causes a change in the british government, which will then not be inclined to waste english taxes in an infinite cycle of wars.

 

[fhaessig]

DOuble post sorry

 

[fhaessig]

But if nelson hadnt defeated rocking*ahem* Napoleon at Waterloo, then how would the poms beat the shit pout of france?

LOL



Just like they did, by calling upon all the favors the Devil owned them.

But that means no Pax Britannica, as the favors will have been spent

 

[fhaessig]

More seriously.

There used to be a good webbook ( I don't know how else to call it ) on a Napoleonic victory at waterloo on http://www.histofig.com/empire/livres/book_01_00.html

I'm not the author and the page was removed ( supposedly because the book was to be printed, though I've never seen it ), so I don't feel confortable posting it or part of it on this forum.


Chapter 17 of this book ( which is the only one available through archive web site ) deals quickly with the aftermath of the battle and pursuit of the prussian army ( the rest of the book is a VERY detailled description on how the french win and then crush the prussians )

 

[fhaessig]

Russia's armies were several month away at least and there was a BIG command problem, as the CiC, MacDonald, was despised by his russian officers as a foreigner. .

Sorry; not MacDonalds, Barclay, obviously. Don't know what I was thinking when I wrote this.

 

[fhaessig]

There used to be a good webbook ( I don't know how else to call it ) on a Napoleonic victory at waterloo on http://www.histofig.com/empire/livres/book_01_00.html

I'm not the author and the page was removed ( supposedly because the book was to be printed, though I've never seen it ), so I don't feel confortable posting it or part of it on this forum.

Never mind that. It's been printed and it's on Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=Steven Marthinsen&page=1