Napoleon wins Waterloo
- Thread starter lucaswillen05
- Start date
- Status
A fair point and oe which I will likely address in the next couple of updates. The same can be said for the Danish contingent and, as you say, the North German Corps. It is also possible that Wellington, discoverig the true position or seeing an opportunity might take offensive action of his own.
In the mmeantime of course time is starting to run out for Napoleon as Barclay de Tolly and Schwarzenburg will be invading France someime in the next few days.
The imminent Battle of Tienen may well be critical to the future of this campaign for both sides and it might well be decided by whose reinforcements arrive first or indeed whether the Prussian reinforcements arrive in time. Should Napoleon pull off a decisive victory here and destroy Blucher's four corps it will be an important turning point
. If he fails o achieve this it will make a war of attrition that France cannot win all but inevitable.
24 June 1815 2AM Blucher's Headqurters five miles east of Tienan
Antcipating battle that day against Grouchy Blucher issued the final orders for the Prussian attack. Anticipating a probable battle against Napoleon himself within the next few days Prussian couriers were dispatched with all speed to Wellington at Antwerp and to the North German Corps (now joined by the Royal Danish Auxllary "Corps", the Prussian Guard V Prussian Corps (York), VI Prussian Corps (Tauentzian)
Blucher gambled that, if he could defeat or destroy Grouchy while holding off Napoleon the campaign and the war would be quickly won without the need for a bloody and drawn out campaig in France. It would however be at least two days (the afternoon of 25 June or sometime on 26 June) before the Coalition troop concentrtion was complete in the vicinity of Tienan.
In the meantme the Hussar General would bait the trap by attacking Grouchy.
Napoleon's Headqurters Geel 6am
The Emperor studied his maps and calculated carefully like the great strategist he was while Soult and the staff awaited his orders in silence. There were only a few days left before he Coalition moved into Eastern France and began to threaten Paris.
"Soult", said the Emeror, take orders. "Grouchy is to stand at Thienan while the Imperial Guard. d'Erlon's Corps and the Cavalry Corps force march to that position. If Grouchy holds today then tomorrow morning will see a great victory. In all probability Blucher will be lost"
It was unlikely that the closest French forces, I Cavalry Corps and d'Erlons corps would reach he battlefield before late afternoon.
"Ney2, ordered the Emperor, "you will take command of I Cavalry Corps and II Corps. Take over command from Grouchy when you reach the battlefieldDon't mess this up as you did at Bautzen and don't make any mistakes as you did at Quatre Bras, I will be close by bringing up the Imperial Guard, Lobasu and the rest of the cavalry. Fix Blucher in position and ensure he cannot escape us again as he did at Planchenoit. If we all do our jobs Blucher will be crushed. The fate of France rests on what we do over the next two or three days"
Antcipating battle that day against Grouchy Blucher issued the final orders for the Prussian attack. Anticipating a probable battle against Napoleon himself within the next few days Prussian couriers were dispatched with all speed to Wellington at Antwerp and to the North German Corps (now joined by the Royal Danish Auxllary "Corps", the Prussian Guard V Prussian Corps (York), VI Prussian Corps (Tauentzian)
Blucher gambled that, if he could defeat or destroy Grouchy while holding off Napoleon the campaign and the war would be quickly won without the need for a bloody and drawn out campaig in France. It would however be at least two days (the afternoon of 25 June or sometime on 26 June) before the Coalition troop concentrtion was complete in the vicinity of Tienan.
In the meantme the Hussar General would bait the trap by attacking Grouchy.
Napoleon's Headqurters Geel 6am
The Emperor studied his maps and calculated carefully like the great strategist he was while Soult and the staff awaited his orders in silence. There were only a few days left before he Coalition moved into Eastern France and began to threaten Paris.
"Soult", said the Emeror, take orders. "Grouchy is to stand at Thienan while the Imperial Guard. d'Erlon's Corps and the Cavalry Corps force march to that position. If Grouchy holds today then tomorrow morning will see a great victory. In all probability Blucher will be lost"
It was unlikely that the closest French forces, I Cavalry Corps and d'Erlons corps would reach he battlefield before late afternoon.
"Ney2, ordered the Emperor, "you will take command of I Cavalry Corps and II Corps. Take over command from Grouchy when you reach the battlefieldDon't mess this up as you did at Bautzen and don't make any mistakes as you did at Quatre Bras, I will be close by bringing up the Imperial Guard, Lobasu and the rest of the cavalry. Fix Blucher in position and ensure he cannot escape us again as he did at Planchenoit. If we all do our jobs Blucher will be crushed. The fate of France rests on what we do over the next two or three days"
Last edited:
If Napoleon can deliver a crushing blow to the Prussians he might cause the break up of the coalition. There would be pressure on the Russians to withdraw from the War and even the Austrians might have second thoughts. The defeat of Wellington followed by a defeat of the Prussians would put pressure on the British government to end the war.
That is cetainly possible. It would have to be a victory on the scale of Jena o have a chance of this. More likely however is a victory that will keep Blucher and Wellington off Napoleo's back for a while in order that he may concentrate on fghting Scwarzenburg and Barclay de Tolly. I thinkk the latter is probably the best Napoleon can hope for at this stage.
Wellington's defeat at Waterloo has undone the British belief that Wellington could defeat anyone. If anything Britain is even more war weary than France. She is also just about out of money. Word of any victory by Napoleon might very well bring the government down.
I have little doubt that the Czar's brother and his advisers are calling for Russia to withdraw from the war. A defeat of Blucher could also trigger an uprising in the new Prussian territories in Western Germany. Prussian rule wasn't popular.
I have little doubt that the Czar's brother and his advisers are calling for Russia to withdraw from the war. A defeat of Blucher could also trigger an uprising in the new Prussian territories in Western Germany. Prussian rule wasn't popular.
What of the follow-up battle if even a remnant of the coalition (which still outweigh the French in potential manpower, right) - say a vengeful Blucher or a remorseless Alexander I follows to France right away? Bar a massive Jena style victory does Bonaparte have the manpower (given that they were reduced to recruiting teenagers to defend the interior) to maintain superiority.
Even a small defeat is something Napoleon can't afford. Especially when he's promised the people of France "peace" as part of the price of becoming Emperor again. Outside of the coalition folding up its tent (which I don't see happening this go around) there's no way France has the numbers to hold out if the Allies just keep pouring it on. There is no Italy (Murat still gets defeated) in the East for reinforcements/money/food and France no longer holds Spain in the West. Napoleon also has ZERO allies (no Saxony, Bavaria, etc. this time)
Even a small defeat is something Napoleon can't afford. Especially when he's promised the people of France "peace" as part of the price of becoming Emperor again. Outside of the coalition folding up its tent (which I don't see happening this go around) there's no way France has the numbers to hold out if the Allies just keep pouring it on. There is no Italy (Murat still gets defeated) in the East for reinforcements/money/food and France no longer holds Spain in the West. Napoleon also has ZERO allies (no Saxony, Bavaria, etc. this time)
Last edited:
Derek Pullem
Donor
When was the last time that Napoleon destroyed an army?
The only occasions that he managed to do this that I can recall are Austerlitz and Jena-Auerstadt. Possibly you can make the case in the Italian campaigns but the recent history has shown that the grand strategic envelopments that he achieved early in his career were just not possible once the Coalition had learnt to be cautious over their lines of communication
It nearly did in TTL. There was a short lived political and financial panic when it was thought that Wellington's army had indeed been destroyed. Thanks to Blucher of course it was not. And of course, though Blucher's army was badly mauled at Waterloo and Plachenoit he escaped thanks to the non arrival f Grouchy, badly delayed dur to Thielmann's counter attack at Wavre on he morning of 19 June.
If Blucher suffers another defeat it could well deepen political divisions within the Coalition. There were however quirte a few such defeats in 1813 and 1814. That said the Coalition Powers had not then almost gone to war with each other over Saxony.
Agreed. Though the Saxon army had mutinied against the Prussians I don't see hem rejoining Napoleon. Same goes for the other former Confederation of the Rhine staes.
This looks like it is going to be a bigger and bloodier version of 1814. Sure, Napoleon can win tactical battlefield victories as he did in 1813 - 14. But each time he wins a battle he loses more me whose loss cannot be afforded. The Coalition can afford to lose men and battles as log as they hold together politically. The war might very well continue into late summer or autumn 1815 but, from a strictly military standpoint Napoleon has little chance of ultimate victory unless the Coalition falls apart politically.
Trouble is that a Napoleon who is (or thinks he is) winning is hardly likely to accept he French borders of 1792. He'll want Belgium at least and probably a good deal more, which in turn means that Prussia at any rate will need to be compensated elsewhere, thus throwing all the agreements, arrived at with such difficulty, into the melting pot.
Will the Allies be ok with that, or will it just seem simpler to continue the war? .
You could make a case for Friedland.
Blucher has taken a risk in an attempt to inflict a major defeat on Grouchy. However, if Grouchy can hold Blucher will be in serious trouble. Then again, Ney could well make a hash of things. While a capable corps commander Ney did not perform, too well with larger forces in independent or autonomous command. Even under fairly close supervision Ney could still make a hash of things as at Bautzen and OTL Waterloo. The same could very well happen here. Napoleon may well win the battle but eiher Ney or Grouchy could ruin the chances of a really decisive French victory.
Why would the allies acquiesce?
Spain and Portugal (to France's western frontiers) hated Napoleon, so did Prussia. Bonaparte annexed the Netherlands and invaded Russia. Now Bonaparte is proclaiming he wants to live in peace with these countries. Are we really supposed to think Alexander I in his newfound religious zeal will be so cool with letting Napoleon stay on the throne? Remember it was Alexander who had suggested Elba promising there would be no trouble when others wanted Bonaparte farther away. Bonaparte made the Tsar look like a fool. The virtual imprisonment of Marie Louise (not that she minded) and Nap II in Austria showed A-H would never let those two go back to France (and Bonaparte would have to invade to get them back which he was in no position to do). Britain having defeated Bonaparte once and sent him packing was not going to lose the power and prestige gained by letting France becoming hegemon over the Continent again. The Coalition still outnumbers the French by a huge number even if they lost Waterloo and smaller battles. It is Bonaparte who cannot take even a single defeat and survive.
Now let's look at things from the French side (particularly from a political point of view):
1) France is weary of war. In fact Napoleon during the Hundred Days promised peace. He lied and said Austria was on his side and that Marie Louise and his son and heir were on their way back to France (he even made a show of preparing their rooms at Fountainbleu). He knew this to be false (and soon all of France would know it too) and even a win at Waterloo would mean tens of thousands of French causalities. Full scale hostilities that will seem to continue without end is something no one in France wants. Demographics were no longer on France's side since they had wasted so many men in their wars.
2) He no longer had some of his marshals - some stayed loyal to Louis XVIII, some stayed neutral and some were dead. Even those who turned back to him, like Ney, would openly say later they personally loathed Bonaparte as a man. The longer the war lasts the more demands a victorious Coalition is going to demand on France - there will no more generous peace of 1814.
3) Spain was gone, Italy was gone, the Confederation of the Rhine was gone, Illyria was gone - all those French conquests whose lands, people and riches had been looted and used to fuel Napoleon's wars were gone and France was back to defending its 1792 borders. The Continental System he used to try to hold Britain in check could never be resurrected either.
4) He had no allies. Zero. Bavaria and Saxony, gone. Murat gone. The Italian peninsula was no longer in his hands and France no longer had the manpower to go on wars to retrieve them.
5) The Levee en masse was no more. During the 100 days Bonaparte was reduced to recruiting teenagers to defend the French homeland. And as pointed out even most of the French calvary horses were lost at Waterloo. And I don't think the people would have stood for another recruit drive of their sons and fathers just so Napoleon could keep a throne. Not to mention not all of France was with him - the Pyrenees, the Vendee, cities like Bourdeux, they were still Royalist strongholds. And there were probably more than that considering the how quickly many flew the Bourbon flag following the 100 Days and the wrath of the White Terror that followed.
6) He no longer had the support of the Church. Yes, some prelates still followed him during the 100 days but this was a man who held the pope (who was now back in Rome where Napoleon wasn't strong enough to have him kidnapped again) for YEARS in solitary confinement to bend him to his will. When Napoleon came back he largely proclaimed that he was no longer in the conquest business, that he accepted the borders as is but this was the same man who told the pope that he (Napoleon) was the new Charlemagne and master over Europe and the Church. Is anyone really likely to forget that?
7) Who was Napoleon's heir going to be? Joseph? So despised by the Spanish (he even stole many of the Spanish crown jewels when he left and lived off the proceeds for the rest of his life) and looked at with contempt by other European nations. It sure as heck wouldn't be Nap II, there was no way Austria was letting that boy out of their grasp and there was no way Bonaparte and all his claims to "peace" could get him without invasion.
I just don't see how Bonaparte survives even with a Waterloo victory. In retrospect he would have been better off staying at Elba. It was just hubris that convinced him (and so many generals) that there would be no problem with him coming back as if nothing had happened. Or that the French Army of 1815 was the same one as a decade earlier.
There is no reason at all for the Coalition not to continure the war. They have had a run of defeats which also happened in 1813 and 1814. But these defeats have not knocked any of the coalition powers out of the war. Even if Blucher is routed there is still the Prussian Guard and another two Prussan corps. Plus Wellington/s renants and 500000 Russians, Austrians and Germans. That is just on France's northern and eastern borders. Militarily Napoleon is most unlikely to win this one. He can only win if the Coaliion falls apart politicallyand it will be difficult to achieve that under the current cirrcumstances. Napoleon will go down fighting eiter ending up overthrown by his own generals and politicians as in 1814 or whwn he has to face reality and surreders. Or of course when he is cornered, the Armee du Nord destroyed and the Emeror killed or captured. Before that happens many thousands of soldiers on both sides will be killed or wounded.
Napoleon does have a faint hope the Coalition will fall apart if he can just d enough militarily to convice hem that the cost of victory will be too high and/or political divisions spli the allianceagainst him.
John Farson
Banned
I agree with all this, and I consider myself to be a bit of a Nappy fanboy. France in 1815 is not the France of 1811, let alone 1805. The power disparity is too great. The only thing that the French can do is prolong their defeat.
Oh, and it isn't just Napoleon who would have been better off in Elba. France also would have been better off as they actually got off rather lightly in 1814, all things considered. It would have a bit more territory today without the 100 Days.
It does make you wonder how how the generals/officers and even politicians who should have known better really thought they were going to pull this off and that the rest of the Europe would just be OK with Napoleon taking up where he left off.
Bonaparte was always ambitious and overconfident (sometimes with reason) but what were the others excuses? Especially those who knew the true state of the army? Caught up in the moment? That was Ney's excuse at his trial. Or having rolled over so many countries since the revolution they just thought they could do it again. The Revolution had the levee en masse and the Empire had the vassal states ruled by Bonaparte puppets/family members to leech supplies, man power and wealth off of. During the 100 Days neither of these things were true and the generals KNEW it.
Indded. And this particular AH is about how Napoleon's defeat (probabl) actually happens in the event he won Waterloo. He may well win battles in this TL and he Coalition may encounter political divisions. It is unlikely to shatter competely however.
The war of the 7th Coalition will very likely last a couple more months ending in perhaps August or September 1815 as Napoleon is overwhelmed by massive Coaltion invasion forces. The war is unlikely to last beyond 1815 in any event.
Even if Napoleon does manage to pulll off a victory that allows him to remain Emperor of France he will probably face a new Coalition in a couple of years. Sooner or later he willl fall.
What we are looking at here is he military and political history of the 1815 campaign as it might have been had events taken a different turn at Waterloo.
I would agree that France was war weary but what is often overlooked is the fact that Great Britain was too. The war was very unpopular as was the high amount of taxes that were being paid. To be honest Britain was just about broke having funded all of the wars against Napoleon. The Defeat of Wellington would have hit the country like a sledge hammer. The so called invincible Wellington defeated.. Should Blucher be crushed it would probably be all that was needed to topple the government and allow the opposition to come to power. This would mean Britain would wash its hands of the conflict.
It also needs to be pointed out that the Bourbons actions after 1814 is what gave Napoleon the chance to come back. The King's brother was an idot in his actions.
As for Alexander I being made to look like a fool regarding Elba remember the allied powers broke most of the promises that they made to Napoleon and were even then planning on removing him from Elba.
While the Spanish and Portuguese governments had little love for Napoleon both had bigger problems to face. In the America's Spain was facing a serious threat to its power as revolts broke out. Even in Spain the Bourbon King was not exactly strong. While both countries might maintain the fiction of being at war with France I doubt if there was a real threat.
I would agree that it is unlikely that any of the German states would switch sides it is possible that another major defeat would see them move to being inactive.
Denmark would move to be inactive. It had little love for the British and the Swedes. Sweden had grabbed Finland and the British had attacked Denmark many years before.
The Czar's brother and other key advisers urged him to pull back as there was the real risk of a revolt in the Polish territories as well as possible problems with the Ottomans.
Should Blucher suffer a defeat there was the real prospect that Prussians western territories might revolt. The Catholic western Germans had little love for the protestant Prussians.
As for the Austrian Empire they may have recovered a lot of lost territory but how secure was their control of Italy. The Empire must look at both Russia and Prussia and see a potential threat. The Saxon problem had shown them to be weary of so called allies.
It also needs to be pointed out that the Bourbons actions after 1814 is what gave Napoleon the chance to come back. The King's brother was an idot in his actions.
As for Alexander I being made to look like a fool regarding Elba remember the allied powers broke most of the promises that they made to Napoleon and were even then planning on removing him from Elba.
While the Spanish and Portuguese governments had little love for Napoleon both had bigger problems to face. In the America's Spain was facing a serious threat to its power as revolts broke out. Even in Spain the Bourbon King was not exactly strong. While both countries might maintain the fiction of being at war with France I doubt if there was a real threat.
I would agree that it is unlikely that any of the German states would switch sides it is possible that another major defeat would see them move to being inactive.
Denmark would move to be inactive. It had little love for the British and the Swedes. Sweden had grabbed Finland and the British had attacked Denmark many years before.
The Czar's brother and other key advisers urged him to pull back as there was the real risk of a revolt in the Polish territories as well as possible problems with the Ottomans.
Should Blucher suffer a defeat there was the real prospect that Prussians western territories might revolt. The Catholic western Germans had little love for the protestant Prussians.
As for the Austrian Empire they may have recovered a lot of lost territory but how secure was their control of Italy. The Empire must look at both Russia and Prussia and see a potential threat. The Saxon problem had shown them to be weary of so called allies.
Last edited:
Blucher would have to be completely destroyed as an effective miiitary force for there to be a serius chance of Lord Liverpool's gvernment falling and probably Wellington must be destroyed as well.
The risks of a Polish revolt at a moment of real cris for the 7th Coalition and/or the possibilities around German revolt/hostilituies beween Russia and he Ottomman Empire etc are threats to he Coalition. As are internal divisions within the Coalition itself over the Saxony Crisis. I don't think a Saxon revolt is likely at this point and it has little chance of success. If the Polish revolt it mght however encourage Saxony to follow suit. This could well divert Russian and Austrian forces from the main war in France and extend the time France might resist. I don't see other German states such as Bavaria defecting back to France however. Certainly not at this point and probably not ever unless Napoleonic France somehow reasserts itself as a dominant power. Which is virtually impossible
But all of this depends on the Coalition breaking and them suddenly being OK with the man who they called an outlaw to the worlds and had treated almost all of them like vassals (breaking up their countries, taking away land to give to his siblings, invading them or blockading them) being in charge of France again (and giving him time to rebuild France's war machine - which he WOULD use again, Napoleon's ambition to be the dominant force in Europe never left him). I can't see that happening. Eventually if given time, he would try to expand France's frontiers - particularly in the areas he had previously annexed.
Also Austria will never return his son and wife even if the Coalition breaks and Bonaparte was no longer in a condition to invade Austria to get them back. So was supposed to be the heir to the reborn Empire - the weak Joseph or the Austrian-raised German-speaking King of Rome?
Also Austria will never return his son and wife even if the Coalition breaks and Bonaparte was no longer in a condition to invade Austria to get them back. So was supposed to be the heir to the reborn Empire - the weak Joseph or the Austrian-raised German-speaking King of Rome?
- Status