What if Napoleon used trenches in Leipzig?

Emperor Tigerstar publishied this video on his channel about the use of trenches in the american civil war, more precisely, at the battle of Cold Harbour:


Summoning what he says, trenches were a extremely effective way to stall larger enemy forces while fighting defensively. This made me wonder: What if Napoleon had a insight about the use of trenches, and ordered his soldiers to dig as fast they could in the battle of Leipzig. Could he had won?
 
In that case, let's assume his men still have the energy and can muster up the proper supplies to build a good trench network (doubtful; they'd be marching around rather intensely for months now after already having campaigned without rest for the previous year, had extremely undependable supply lines and their mobile train lay captured abandoned in Russia and local depots depleated, and had various contigents of dubious loyalty). Even assuming all this, than the Allies would go back to their original plan of not directly engaging the Emperor and either march around his now more static force to secure the defection of more of Germany or start picking off his marshals. Leipzeg isen't a strategic position from a logistical/strategic standpoint, nor is time, internal politics, or other fronts a concern for the Allies to oblige them to have to try to win a decisive battle. They are winning whenever Napoleon actively isen't as his army and geostrategic position decays, and that won't change unless Nappy can breakout and get into France proper to recuperate, resupply, and pose a threatening defense of the Fatherland or a counterstroke
 
Trenches were used during sieges and Napoleon used trenches against and natural defensive position against superior enemy. Trenches warfare is nothing new.
 
Trenches were used during sieges and Napoleon used trenches against and natural defensive position against superior enemy. Trenches warfare is nothing new.

At least as old as the Romans, and probably a lot older even than that. All that’s changed is how much damage you can do without leaving your trench.
 
Well, under what conditions does trench warfare develop, and how were they present in WWI and the Iran-Iraq War and not in the Napoleonic Wars?
 
Well, under what conditions does trench warfare develop, and how were they present in WWI and the Iran-Iraq War and not in the Napoleonic Wars?

Army sizes and logistics systems, mostly. Trench Warfare requires one to be able to sit their force in one area for an extended period of time in an area the enemy can't or would be at a huge disadvantage manuvering around. Napoleonic armies were too big and operating too far from safe, productive areas of the rear to be kept in supply fully from the home front and so had to forage off the land: a practice that precludes spending too long in one place as you pick local food stores dry, and had to be marching in order to catch the enemy and actually battle him (since they're not hunkering down, by and large, like one would do in previous wars in forts and cities).
 
Emperor Tigerstar publishied this video on his channel about the use of trenches in the american civil war, more precisely, at the battle of Cold Harbour:


Summoning what he says, trenches were a extremely effective way to stall larger enemy forces while fighting defensively. This made me wonder: What if Napoleon had a insight about the use of trenches, and ordered his soldiers to dig as fast they could in the battle of Leipzig. Could he had won?

How about a possibility of the allies, with their vastly superior numbers, get more troops on the Western bank of Elster River, also dig the trenches and start a regular blockade?
350px-Leipzig_Battle_2.svg.png
 
Battlefield defences tended more to be built up as redoubts rather than dug down as trenches.
The Battle of Borodino being the go to example for Napoleonic warfare.
Given the casualties the Grand Army suffered storming those perhaps the question should be what if Bonaparte had built redoubts at Leipzig?
 
Top