Wellington replaced by different commander at Waterloo.

[Darth_Kiryan]

This is just a simple question, but is Wellington at all necessary to ensure Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo? Is there anyone else at the time, including any other Prussian, Austrian or Russian commander, who could have defeated Napoleon in the Hundred Days?

This is based upon Wellington dying somehow before Waterloo, so who would be more likely to replace him, and what would be the outcomes if said person lost? Or would they be more successful?

 

[lucaswillen05]

You don't have to have Wellington dying before the Hundred Dsys campaign. He could be killed or captured at Quatre Bras or indeed at Waterloo (head carried off by a French cannon ball, shot by a French skirmisher etc) In this case he might be replaced by Uxbridge or Lord Hill.

Napoleon actually came very close to winning at Waterloo. Following the fall of La Haye Sainte here was a period of an hour or so when an attack by the Imperial Gaurd could jhave won the battle for the French. At this stage of the battle, with the Prussians facing their own crisis at Planchenoit Ziethan was talked out of sending his corps there by Barion Mufflng. Had this not haappened Wewllington coulld not have transferred Vivian and Vandaleur from their position on the British right and that would have given thre Gaurd more of a chance in their OTL attack. Had that attack beeen launched an hour earlier than it was Wellington's centre would have been much weaker than it was. Had the Gaurd broken through it seems likely that Wellington's army would have brooken.

Next daty Napoleon would have turned against Blucher who would have had to fight or retreat. After that a bigger and bloodier 1814 style campaign would be the most likely outcome unless the victory in Belgium was big enough to knock Britain (Coalition paymaster) and Prussia out of the war.

 

[Simreeve]

Blucher dying before the campaign, and being replaced by a general less willing to cooperate with the British (by retreating towards them after Ligny, rather than back home towards Prussia), would probably have been a worse problem for the allies...

 

[Fredrick II Barbarossa]

Well big deal so what if napoleon manages to somehow win at Waterloo and wellington dies pretty tough to win a victory at waterloo with the odds against napoleon even without Wellington. What you see is a russain defeat of France. Remember at this time the entire russian army virtually unstoppable by the french in 1814-1815 Alexander thought of himself as being the saviour of Europe and so would no longer negotiate with napoleon. Napoleon will eventually be defeated but this time by the russians rather than the british so you would get a different outcome at the treaty of vienna because now Russia has far more bargaining power than it did in otl. Quite frankly Napoleon making a comeback even after winning at waterloo against the russians and thier allies or even the russians by themselves is highly unlikely and nearing asb. Face it napoleons days are numbered by this point. At best maybe another couple months of fighting but he will be defeated if not by the british than the russians.

 

[Redbeard]

I'm not that impressed by Wellington and certainly not for Waterloo. What did he do? Took up a defensive position, waited for the French to attack and had the Prussians save his ass when the French had him hard pressed!

But imagine Blücher not showing up in time, and Wellington would have been blamed for just letting himself grind down by Napoleon.

Or if the ground had been dry and the French (artillery) thus had advanced faster. In that case Blücher might have shown up at the OTL time, but Wellington long since swept aside.

So concerning your actual question, I think Wellington could have been replaced with a lot of alternatives, who would have chosen the same obvious defensive position and would have succeeded if the Prussians show up in time. But if the ground is dry the Prussians have less time.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

PS: Sorry Brits, nothing personal, but I think we've all been carried a little away for the last couple of centuries. Welllington sure was the dude in the right time and place, but that isn't necessarily the same as the world class commander.

 

[larpsidekick]

I'm not that impressed by Wellington and certainly not for Waterloo. What did he do? Took up a defensive position, waited for the French to attack and had the Prussians save his ass when the French had him hard pressed!

But imagine Blücher not showing up in time, and Wellington would have been blamed for just letting himself grind down by Napoleon.

Or if the ground had been dry and the French (artillery) thus had advanced faster. In that case Blücher might have shown up at the OTL time, but Wellington long since swept aside.

So concerning your actual question, I think Wellington could have been replaced with a lot of alternatives, who would have chosen the same obvious defensive position and would have succeeded if the Prussians show up in time. But if the ground is dry the Prussians have less time.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

PS: Sorry Brits, nothing personal, but I think we've all been carried a little away for the last couple of centuries. Welllington sure was the dude in the right time and place, but that isn't necessarily the same as the world class commander.

Well, apart from the offensive moments (defeat of D'Eleron, the Guard) , the deployment of troops (Reinforcement of Hougomont & La Haye Saint etc), the use of reserves, the morale benefit of 'Old Nosey' on the British troops not a lot. 'Taking trouble' over the battle, using every man and formation to the utmost - for a 'simple defensive battle' there was a lot to do.

Oh, and agreeing to fight. What's always forgotten is Wellington was only going to fight if the Prussians were going to support him. No support = British retreat on Brussels, to the Channel ports and home, picking up the unengaged corps from the right wing.

However, on your last point - it's not Waterloo that makes Wellington a great commander - it's Salamanca, Assaye, Vitoria, Busaco. Waterloo was the battle he took most trouble over - and had to with the weak army he commanded - but the offensive battles, especially in the Peninsular, are works of genius.

 

[Cymraeg]

I'm not that impressed by Wellington and certainly not for Waterloo. What did he do? Took up a defensive position, waited for the French to attack and had the Prussians save his ass when the French had him hard pressed!

But imagine Blücher not showing up in time, and Wellington would have been blamed for just letting himself grind down by Napoleon.

Or if the ground had been dry and the French (artillery) thus had advanced faster. In that case Blücher might have shown up at the OTL time, but Wellington long since swept aside.

So concerning your actual question, I think Wellington could have been replaced with a lot of alternatives, who would have chosen the same obvious defensive position and would have succeeded if the Prussians show up in time. But if the ground is dry the Prussians have less time.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

PS: Sorry Brits, nothing personal, but I think we've all been carried a little away for the last couple of centuries. Welllington sure was the dude in the right time and place, but that isn't necessarily the same as the world class commander.

The thing is that he fought at Waterloo because he knew that the Prussians were on their way. That was the plan - whoever Napoleon attacked would be supported by the other. He had to protect Brussels and he also had to protect his line of supply through Hal. A defensive stand on the best piece of land around was therefore his only choice, especially as he had an army that wasn't a patch on his Peninsular Army (he said that if he'd had all his veterans there he would have attacked).
The thought of Uxbridge being in charge makes me feel vaguely ill. Hill on the other hand was an excellent commander.

 

[Michael B]

However, on your last point - it's not Waterloo that makes Wellington a great commander - it's Salamanca, Assaye, Vitoria, Busaco. Waterloo was the battle he took most trouble over - and had to with the weak army he commanded - but the offensive battles, especially in the Peninsular, are works of genius.

He was also a master in logistics. In part thanks to the Royal Navy he supplied his army in Spain from Britain. Even with naval supremacy that was no mean feat when one considers that most armies lived off the land. Not only that, but he was able to switch supplies during the Peninsular campaign.

 

[Smaug]

He or perhaps whoever, might've chosen the same ground. It was the best spot.

 

[larpsidekick]

He or perhaps whoever, might've chosen the same ground. It was the best spot.

It's not all about choosing the ground though - you can't just choose a bit of land and go, 'right, Frenchies, have at you' as your plucky chaps fire three rounds a minute. If it were, why did Wellington spend the day riding up and down the field, loosing most of his military family to enemy fire, giving orders, bring forward reinforcements, rallying broken troops, reordering lines when broken... And remember, the Anglo-Dutch army was not the instrument that finished the Peninsular War - not only were the Dutch troops often reluctant (at least one battalion was wearing their uniforms from French service), but the British troops were mostly inexperienced, the veterans having been sent to deal with the Americans after the end of the French Wars.

And it wasn't a totally obvious spot - the forest to the rear would prevent an easy retreat in case the Prussians failed to appear or a major problem occurred. A less trusting,

 

[lucaswillen05]

Blucher dying before the campaign, and being replaced by a general less willing to cooperate with the British (by retreating towards them after Ligny, rather than back home towards Prussia), would probably have been a worse problem for the allies...

You don't even have to have that. Blucher qwas unhorsed and ridden over by French cavalry at Lignny. Suppose he had been killed or captured. He would hve been replaced by Gneisenau. Without support from the Prussians Wellington might not have stood at Wateloo and, had he done so, would probably have lost.

 

[lucaswillen05]

It's not all about choosing the ground though - you can't just choose a bit of land and go, 'right, Frenchies, have at you' as your plucky chaps fire three rounds a minute. If it were, why did Wellington spend the day riding up and down the field, loosing most of his military family to enemy fire, giving orders, bring forward reinforcements, rallying broken troops, reordering lines when broken... And remember, the Anglo-Dutch army was not the instrument that finished the Peninsular War - not only were the Dutch troops often reluctant (at least one battalion was wearing their uniforms from French service), but the British troops were mostly inexperienced, the veterans having been sent to deal with the Americans after the end of the French Wars.

And it wasn't a totally obvious spot - the forest to the rear would prevent an easy retreat in case the Prussians failed to appear or a major problem occurred. A less trusting,

And a large portion of the army being composed of somewhat dubious Dutch Belgians and assorted Germans. Modern research into the battle exposes the crisis in Wellington's Centre after the fall of La Haye Sainte. For about an hour Wellington's position was on the verge of collapse. Had Napoleon committed the Gaurdd before Wellington was able to reinforce that part of the position say between 6 and 7pm. He was only able to do so because the Prussians were attaking Napoleon's right.

 

[Nytram01]

You don't even have to have that. Blucher qwas unhorsed and ridden over by French cavalry at Lignny. Suppose he had been killed or captured. He would hve been replaced by Gneisenau. Without support from the Prussians Wellington might not have stood at Wateloo and, had he done so, would probably have lost.

Is that referance to the fact that Gneisenau wanted to abandon Wellington and fall back into Prussia after being beaten at Ligny and when overruled by Blucher organized the march to Waterloo at a slow pace so the Prussians would be able to fall back easilly should Wellington be beaten before they arrived.

 

[Simreeve]

You don't even have to have that. Blucher qwas unhorsed and ridden over by French cavalry at Lignny. Suppose he had been killed or captured. He would have been replaced by Gneisenau. Without support from the Prussians Wellington might not have stood at Wateloo and, had he done so, would probably have lost.

Gneisenau was in favour of the cooperation with Wellington's army, and would have tried to carry out the same plan that Blucher did.

 

[Mike]

It's not all about choosing the ground though - you can't just choose a bit of land and go, 'right, Frenchies, have at you' as your plucky chaps fire three rounds a minute. If it were, why did Wellington spend the day riding up and down the field, loosing most of his military family to enemy fire, giving orders, bring forward reinforcements, rallying broken troops, reordering lines when broken...

So? Isn't that what he, like any typical defensive general, was supposed to do: hold on for dear life? Nothing special there. It is a lot easier to defend than to attack. Depending on how entreched a defensive position is, an attacking force often needs to outnumber a defensive force to succeed. Napoleon's forces was equal in number to Wellington's forces and Napoleon still almost won.

And remember, the Anglo-Dutch army was not the instrument that finished the Peninsular War - not only were the Dutch troops often reluctant (at least one battalion was wearing their uniforms from French service), but the British troops were mostly inexperienced, the veterans having been sent to deal with the Americans after the end of the French Wars.

Big deal. The French did not have the Grande Armée with them at Waterloo. The best French troops already perished in the Russian winter, to Spanish guerillas, and to Austrian troops. Furthermore, the Pennisular War veterans were never that good as British fanboys like to pretend; they did not have to face the best French troops, after all.

Furthermore, the "reluctant" Dutch troops is nothing more than a myth disgustingly perpetrated by British fanboys. It was Chassé's Dutch forces that attacked and prevented one wing of the Imperial Guard from breaking through while the British forces on the spot fled. There were also reports of British cavalry cowardly refusing orders to engage French cavalry.

And it wasn't a totally obvious spot - the forest to the rear would prevent an easy retreat in case the Prussians failed to appear or a major problem occurred. A less trusting,

This either proves that Wellington is not even a good defensive general or, more likely, it proves that Wellington was forced to give battle even if the Prussians did not promise to come to his aid. He had no choice but to give battle because he knew that the faster French forces would have caught up to his army and destroyed it if it tried to escape to Britain.

 

[Cymraeg]

Actually the forest point is something of a moot one. There was little undergrowth in it, so Wellington's army could have passed through it fairly easily. And the French Army at Waterloo was the best one that he'd had for years - quite a few men had been stuck in places like Hamburg during the 1813-14 period due to really duff strategic decisions by Boney, so they hadn't been wiped out.

 

[Elfwine]

Actually the forest point is something of a moot one. There was little undergrowth in it, so Wellington's army could have passed through it fairly easily. And the French Army at Waterloo was the best one that he'd had for years - quite a few men had been stuck in places like Hamburg during the 1813-14 period due to really duff strategic decisions by Boney, so they hadn't been wiped out.

Not to mention returned POWs, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm reasonably sure another good commander would have been able to win at Waterloo, and I don't know enough about the battle to comment on the quality of the nonBritish troops (counting the King's German Legion as British for simplicity), but a plodder with a mediocre army would not have won there, with or without the Prussians.

 

[Nytram01]

So? Isn't that what he, like any typical defensive general, was supposed to do: hold on for dear life? Nothing special there. It is a lot easier to defend than to attack. Depending on how entreched a defensive position is, an attacking force often needs to outnumber a defensive force to succeed. Napoleon's forces was equal in number to Wellington's forces and Napoleon still almost won.

Almost butters no parsnips.

Wellington's army was still holding the high ground and still had enough gas left to counter attack when the Prussians arrived despite being hard pressed throughout the day by the French.

No matter how close run a thing it was Napoleon still failed, Wellington endured and the Coalition won.

And for that matter, Napoleon displayed no great level of skill during the Waterloo battle and his performance, and that of the French, was nothing special at this battle either.

 

[Elfwine]

Almost butters no parsnips.

Wellington's army was still holding the high ground and still had enough gas left to counter attack when the Prussians arrived despite being hard pressed throughout the day by the French.

No matter how close run a thing it was Napoleon still failed, Wellington endured and the Coalition won.

And for that matter, Napoleon displayed no great level of skill during the Waterloo battle and his performance, and that of the French, was nothing special at this battle either.

I've a question. How close do you think Wellington was to defeat?

Let's say the Prussians are coming but are delayed for 24 hours. Would Napoleon be in a position - assuming all events at Waterloo have gone as OTL for question's sake - to push the issue?

Because if I'm not mistaken, he was pretty much out of reserves except for the Guard by the time he put them in.

And that sort of limits what his army can do if the thin red line hasn't cracked.

 

[Mike]

Actually the forest point is something of a moot one. There was little undergrowth in it, so Wellington's army could have passed through it fairly easily. And the French Army at Waterloo was the best one that he'd had for years - quite a few men had been stuck in places like Hamburg during the 1813-14 period due to really duff strategic decisions by Boney, so they hadn't been wiped out.

The best one he had for years? Better than the one that Napoleon fielded in his invasion of Russia? No.

Sure, there were experienced soldiers in the French army at Waterloo but it was also padded with recruits. There were recruits even in the Imperial Guard in order to fatten the Guard and fool the enemies that the Guard was still as big and as formidable as ever. The French forces at Waterloo was good but was still far inferior to any French force that came before. And they were not helped by the raining weather before the battle which limited their firepower effectiveness.