DBWI: WI Napoleon had lost the Battle of La Haye Sainte.

Would it mean an earlier end for the War of the Sixth Coalition? And how would it change the finale fate of Napoleon and France?
 
Being the pyrrhic victory that it was I wonder if a straight defeat might not have actually improved his position. Perhaps similarly to Blucher at Ligny he would be able to withdraw and regroup before fighting another day. Blucher of course used the troops he extricated from Ligny to great effect just a few days later at Mons against the retreating French.

As it was the French army was utterly exhausted by the time the imperial guard broke the Allied lines. If perhaps Napolean had accepted his repulse earlier in the day then perhaps he could have redeployed his army better to face the assembling armies of the Coalition at Mons.

Of course I understand why he fought the actions at Ligny and La Haye-Sainte, (to attack isolated sections of the coalitions army), but both battles - whilst tactically victorious ache iced little strategically.
 
I don't think it would Change much for France. The more interesting effect it would have on the career of this British General whose Name elapses me. Up to the 1815 campaign he had a good Service record (well at least not a bad one). Since Napoleon the careers of sucessful Generals usually included a political career when they grow older. (Schwarzenberg suceeding Metternich, Lee becoming president of the Confederation, Mac Arthur becoming President after the second civil war, Benedek after his sucessful campaigns against the Prussians and later against the Russians)

Ahh theres the Name: Wellesley - Imagine a Wellesley government in Britain - I assume he would improve the British army and not letting it decline. A British viictory might even prevent the diplomatic loss at the Second Viennese Congress of 1816. The loss of Malta and Gibraltar to the Habsburg puppet Maltese Knights and Spain respectively did effectivle ban the Brits from the Mediterrenaean. That means that the 3rd French republic does not hold on Egypt and the Negrelli canal.
 
Being the pyrrhic victory that it was I wonder if a straight defeat might not have actually improved his position. Perhaps similarly to Blucher at Ligny he would be able to withdraw and regroup before fighting another day. Blucher of course used the troops he extricated from Ligny to great effect just a few days later at Mons against the retreating French.

As it was the French army was utterly exhausted by the time the imperial guard broke the Allied lines. If perhaps Napolean had accepted his repulse earlier in the day then perhaps he could have redeployed his army better to face the assembling armies of the Coalition at Mons.

Of course I understand why he fought the actions at Ligny and La Haye-Sainte, (to attack isolated sections of the coalitions army), but both battles - whilst tactically victorious ache iced little strategically.

I´m not sure if a retreat in case of a defeat of La Haye Sainte is so easy. After all Napoleon would have faced not only the Prussian but also the still intact Allied Army of Wellessl. And it would be definitly near impossible to reunite with Grouchy after a defeat. Mons has like Leipzig the reputation as a all deciding victory, but Napoleon was still cable to escape with an intact army of 50.000 men and keep the war going on till winter 1815. My personal idea is, that with a shorter War of the Sixth Coalition, the First Peace of Paris would have stayed, because the Allies at this time still fought the war theoretical just against Napoleon and not against France. So Dunkirk, Metz and Straßburg may have stayed a part of France.
 
Top