WI napoleon captures the British army in the battle of waterloo and destroys the Prussian army

[Imperial 1914]

I was reading the alternate history book "Napoleon victorious an Alternative History of the Battle of Waterloo by by Peter G. Tsouras" and it made me wonder what if everything had gone right in the Battle of Waterloo for Napoleon and Napoleon and his Marshalls/Generals had really managed to win the battle of waterloo and capture/force the surrender the British army and its leaders and defeat and destroy the Prussian army ?what would happen next with Napoleon holding prisoner the only army of the United kingdom and the duke of Wellington and the Prussian army out of commission?

 

[MikeDwight]

Meh, I'll wait for the British to tell me about it. They don't write that one do they? See, the French Revolution "IS"... We'd all be French like...?

 

[MikeDwight]

I Guess Napoleon would be entombed in some fancy public tomb. They'd keep all the laws exactly the same like when he was in office. They'd name everything Napoleon. Who knows!

 

[alexmilman]

I was reading the alternate history book "Napoleon victorious an Alternative History of the Battle of Waterloo by by Peter G. Tsouras" and it made me wonder what if everything had gone right in the Battle of Waterloo for Napoleon and Napoleon and his Marshalls/Generals had really managed to win the battle of waterloo and capture/force the surrender the British army and its leaders and defeat and destroy the Prussian army ?what would happen next with Napoleon holding prisoner the only army of the United kingdom and the duke of Wellington and the Prussian army out of commission?

Well, if we assume as stipulated that the British army is surrounded and surrendered, this means that the Prussians have a chance to get away reasonably easily because Nappy simply can’t advance in two directions simultaneously and as per your scenario Napoleon concentrates on the Brits while Blucher is not marching to their rescue after the Ligny.
So Nappy has approximately 200,000 field troops (plus 100,000 in the garrisons) .
Blucher still has approximately 100,000, Austrians 210,000 and Russians 150,000 with a clear intention not to get engaged until they get together.

Nappy had up to 300,000 raw recruits in training (not sure if he had enough weapons). At least in 1814 French manufactures could not produce enough muskets .

Prussia had approximately 100,000 experienced soldiers in the reserve (V, VI, VIII corps) plus landwehr. The Russians probably could bring up at least extra 100,000 experienced troops. Can’t find anything about the Austrians.

So the allies had immediate overall numeric advantage and probably would not be worse off in the midterm.

What Nappy was short of at that time were the army level commanders. Davout was in Paris, Soult was not too good as a chief of staff and at least during Waterloo campaign Ney was his top field commander which would be funny if it was not tragic. So the allies could repeat the previous campaign and keep beating his marshals disregarding Nappy’s local successes.

 

[Imperial 1914]

Well, if we assume as stipulated that the British army is surrounded and surrendered, this means that the Prussians have a chance to get away reasonably easily because Nappy simply can’t advance in two directions simultaneously and as per your scenario Napoleon concentrates on the Brits while Blucher is not marching to their rescue after the Ligny.
So Nappy has approximately 200,000 field troops (plus 100,000 in the garrisons) .
Blucher still has approximately 100,000, Austrians 210,000 and Russians 150,000 with a clear intention not to get engaged until they get together.

Nappy had up to 300,000 raw recruits in training (not sure if he had enough weapons). At least in 1814 French manufactures could not produce enough muskets .

Prussia had approximately 100,000 experienced soldiers in the reserve (V, VI, VIII corps) plus landwehr. The Russians probably could bring up at least extra 100,000 experienced troops. Can’t find anything about the Austrians.

So the allies had immediate overall numeric advantage and probably would not be worse off in the midterm.

What Nappy was short of at that time were the army level commanders. Davout was in Paris, Soult was not too good as a chief of staff and at least during Waterloo campaign Ney was his top field commander which would be funny if it was not tragic. So the allies could repeat the previous campaign and keep beating his marshals disregarding Nappy’s local successes.

how much would it hurt the coalition if the united kingdom stop the financial subsidies to its allies as part of their attempt to negotiate the release of its captured army from napoleon and could napoleon play the Russian, Austrian and Prussians against each other since each one had their own claims and plans for post napoleon europe and war could had broken out if napoleon had not surprised the congress of vienna with his return and if negiotiations had gone worse

 

[Miguel Lanius]

Big whoop, the Russians will get him anyway.

And so what if Nappy manages to hold that out too? There's Austrians, more Prussians, the Portuguese and Spanish might even pitch in anyway.

Everyone was sick of Napoleon and he would fall down even if all of Europe has to kick his head in.

 

[alexmilman]

how much would it hurt the coalition if the united kingdom stop the financial subsidies to its allies as part of their attempt to negotiate the release of its captured army from napoleon and could napoleon play the Russian, Austrian and Prussians against each other since each one had their own claims and plans for post napoleon europe and war could had broken out if napoleon had not surprised the congress of vienna with his return and if negiotiations had gone worse

1st, would it be inevitable that the Brits are going to behave as you described? After all, nothing terrible is going to happen to the captured troops and nothing threatens Britain directly. Taking into the account that their army would capitulate only after a serious resistance (Wellington was neither a coward nor an incompetent so I don’t think that the OP scenario is fully realistic; most probably at least some troops would be evacuated), there would be plenty of the heroic stories to cheer the nation. I’d guess that the chances are at least 50:50 that the reaction would be extreme anger and more subsidies. Not sure if at that point the subsidies were even necessary, at least in a short term: they all have fully mobilized veteran armies.
2nd, at that point Nappy’s ability to play allies against each other were approximately the same as for me to become a ballet dancer, aka zero. They may have differences but they also have the unifying common goal: to get rid of Nappy.

 

[marktaha]

Read "If Napoleon had won the Battle of Waterloo" in "If It Had Happened Otherwise".

 

[Plundenoru]

Even if the British somehow agree to a separate peace, there were already Austrian and Russian troops coming for Napoleon, which would mean Austria and Russia now have a stronger hand to play at the Congress of Vienna. And at that point the French public wasn't exactly so excited for more and more wars, so I wouldn't be surprised if some French loyalists attempt at getting rid of him.

 

[Mikestone8]

How many casualties does Napoleon take in tthe process of winning these victories.

Keep in mind that in 1814 he had been reduced to calling up 16yos. The release of prisoners in 1814/15 gave him a core of seasoned veterans, but these are irreplaceable and will get fewer after each battle - even a successful battle. So how long before he is back to raw recruits again?

 

[alexmilman]

How many casualties does Napolson take in tthe process of winning these victories.

Keep in mind that in 1814 he had been reduced to calling up 16yos. The release of prisoners in 1814/15 gave him a core of seasoned veterans, but these are irreplaceable and will get fewer after each battle - even a successful battle. So how long before he is back to raw recruits again?

Equally important question is how many of these new recruits would he be able to arm properly? French military production had serious limits and even in 1813 it could not satisfy his requirements even with the allowances for lower quality of the muskets. In 1814 some of the troops raised for the defense of Paris had been armed with the pikes.

And don’t forget that even if Nappy manages not just to capture the British army but also completely destroy Blucher’s army as well (how exactly both these goals could be achieved is beyond me), Prussia still have 80-100K (3 corps including the Guards) of the regular veteran troops in the reserve on Prussian territory. In other words, there are 400-450K veteran allied troops marching against him with a possibility to get more trained and properly armed soldiers.

 

[Pauh the federalist]

Napolion should use this high point in the conflict to sue for peace in a way that allows him to stay in power under the premise of "defeating me may be possible, but based on how high the cost has been, are you willing to cash that check" and see if he can try to get a negotiated settlement like what the Japanese where hoping they could pull by inflicting high enough allied casualties during operation downfall in WW2 to get their own settlment by making the presumed cost of total victory too great (weather thats true or not).

 

[ranoncles]

As always, people underestimate the psychological impact of events. Most wars are won or lost by the political will to continue and not by the availability of material means, certainly in the 19th century.

Great Britain’s war against France was never universally popular due to the high costs and Wellington was always very careful not to incur heavy casualties as this would undermine the popular support for the war. He was also very aware that Britain couldn’t sustain the heavy casualties continental powers could because Britain focused on a Navy and not an Army. As such, the loss of the British contingent (despite it only being 1/3 of the Dutch-British-German Allied Army) would have devastating political consequences. No government survives the loss of their main army so a new British government would have to put out peace feelers before being able to drum up support for continuing the war if they had been so inclined.

Most likely, Napoleon would eagerly accept any reasonable peace with Britain. It would have economic, domestic political and diplomatic advantages to do so.

These negotiations would also seriously undermine the remaining allies. They not only relied upon British funding to the extent they couldn’t realistically fight a war against France without it, Wellington had been their lucky mascot, far more than Blucher or Schwarzenberg had been despite Wellington never having fought Napoleon before 1815.

Napoleon defeating Wellington and Blucher (who outnumbered him almost 2-1) would demoralise the Russians and the Austrians, to say nothing of the remaining Prussians. While these nations indeed had sizeable manpower reserves available, these were unlikely to be thrown against France IMO.

For example, King Frederick-William of Prussia would be unlikely to risk what remained of his Army and thereby leaving his country vulnerable. Prussia, Russia and Austria were allies against Napoleon but also rivals to the extent that alliances and treaties were actually made against each other during the Vienna Congress. They might be fighting Napoleon but they were also keeping a wary eye on each other.

So that leaves a Russian Army and an Austrian Army near France’s Eastern border facing Napoleon with almost equal numbers. France is exhausted from 20 years of war while Russia is almost in as bad a shape while Austria needs British gold or it will have to reduce its army considerably.

Under those conditions, I just don’t see the remaining allies fighting it out, hoping for a victory after having seen its two greatest fighting generals (Wellington and Blucher) already humiliated. A negotiated peace would be the most likely outcome with Austria playing the long game of hoping that Napoleon II will be less belligerent and a possible ally against Prussian-Russian pressure.

If Napoleon made moves to cross the Rhine and take the war eastwards, I can believe the allies would fight, eagerly pushed by the Austrians. But if Napoleon continued his diplomatic peace offensive, backed up by a victorious Army and a enthusiastic populace, I just don't see the Austrians keeping up the fight. And if they are out, Alexander of Russia has no other choice but to withdraw his army too.

 

[Mikestone8]

A negotiated peace would be the most likely outcome

A sort o "second treaty of Amiens" while both sides go their breath back for the next round?

 

[ranoncles]

A sort o "second treaty of Amiens" while both sides go their breath back for the next round?

Depends on what kind of Napoleon has returned....if it's the old dictator who wants to rule the world, another war is inevitable.
If it is a chastened Napoleon intent on securing the throne for his son and leaving a legacy.....the peace might well hold until his OTL death.

 

[Mikestone8]

Depends on what kind of Napoleon has returned....if it's the old dictator who wants to rule the world, another war is inevitable.
If it is a chastened Napoleon intent on securing the throne for his son and leaving a legacy.....the peace might well hold until his OTL death.

Chastened how? He's just made one of the most spectacular comebacks in history and scored a near-impossible victory in Belgium.

Certainly that is what the Allies will assume. And they know that the last thing they need is a truce giving him the chance to train up a new army. Their only sane course is to press on until his existing army is ground to powder.

 

[isabella]

.if it's the old dictator who wants to rule the world, another war is inevitable.

For your information almost all the wars against Napoleon were started by the Coalitions against him (and when he was the first to start, was only because he was trying to obtain something who he hoped would stop Great Britain once for all).
The ones who always wanted war were the English not Napoleon

 

[alexmilman]

Chastened how? He's just made one of the most spectacular comebacks in history and scored a near-impossible victory in Belgium.

Certainly that is what the Allies will assume. And they know that the last thing they need is a truce giving him the chance to train up a new army. Their only sane course is to press on until his existing army is ground to powder.

Even if while being on Elba Nappy suddenly became a completely new man (who, however, just kicked the sh-t out of the Brits and Prussians but never mind), nobody would believe him.

I have very serious doubts that the Brits would capitulate just for the purpose of “saving” their army because Nappy was not going to start killing the POWs and those who matter (officers and generals) would be living comfortably in France. Defeat by Napoleon definitely would not come as a shock (OTL victory was considered almost a miracle), the Navy was there guarding the homeland and there were continental allies marching to deal with the Ogre.

As for the rest of the allies, they were ready to accept the casualties: this consideration did not stop them in 1813-14.

By the end of May, the total armed forces available to Napoleon had reached 198,000 with 66,000 more in depots training up but not yet ready for deployment. Approximately 100,000 had been deployed on the main front (Armée du Nord).

The immediately available coalition armies for the main front numbered 742,000. Besides the Great Powers, most of the German states contributed.

So if Wellington’s Army of Flanders (93,000) is completely destroyed and Blucher is defeated suffering heavy losses of, say, 15-20,000 out of his 116,000 while Napoleon did not loss a single soldier (😂), the Allies still have the numeric odds much better than at Leipzig and they had 2 ready reserve armies, Russian and Prussian.

Additionally the allies had:
Swiss Army 37,000
Astro-Sardinian Army of Upper Italy 50,000
Austrian Army of Naples 23,000
Anglo-Sicilian Army
Prussian Reserve Army (3 corps)
Russian Reserve Army (2 army corps, grenadier division and Reserve Cavalry Corps)
Portuguese troops (12-14,000)
2 Spanish armies in a stage of mobilization
Danish and Hanseatic contingent

Military mobilisation during the Hundred Days - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

But if coalition falls apart, Prussia is #1 on Nappy’s list and if coalition falls apart due to the prussian “betrayal” Prussia is on its own. Not to mention that at that time the Prussians hated not just Nappy but the French in general and did not behave well in France so that they’d expect retribution in kind. Alexander is seemingly the least motivated except that he was dead set on destroying Nappy and on this he was backed up by the Russian public sentiment. Austria, just as Prussia, would expect retaliation in the case of Nappy’s victory.

Nappy was beaten in 1814 after a series of victories in 1813 and 1814 so how would it be different in 1815? The formula for victory was known and little changed. If anything, it was worse for Nappy because some of the marshals did not join him in 1815.

So to whom Nappy could appeal with some believable proposals? And why would anybody believe these proposals?

 

[alexmilman]

For your information almost all the wars against Napoleon were started by the Coalitions against him (and when he was the first to start, was only because he was trying to obtain something who he hoped would stop Great Britain once for all).
The ones who always wanted war were the English not Napoleon

This is formally correct but has little to do with the fact that Nappy was dominating the continental Europe (or at least tried to) and that at least some of the coalitions had been triggered by his annexations, redrawing map of Europe and the attempts to dictate economic policies to the continent. The Brits did, of course, a lot of incitement but Austria, Prussia (and to a lesser degree Russia) had their own reasons as well. Even Sweden did (unprovoked occupation of the Swedish Pomerania in 1812 pretty much killed pro-French party and made the Crown Prince really happy 😜).

 

[isabella]

This is formally correct but has little to do with the fact that Nappy was dominating the continental Europe (or at least tried to) and that at least some of the coalitions had been triggered by his annexations, redrawing map of Europe and the attempts to dictate economic policies to the continent. The Brits did, of course, a lot of incitement but Austria, Prussia (and to a lesser degree Russia) had their own reasons as well. Even Sweden did (unprovoked occupation of the Swedish Pomerania in 1812 pretty much killed pro-French party and made the Crown Prince really happy 😜).

Well he was trying to drying English support and was frustrated because the other rulers do not collaborate enough (yes, that backfired spectacularly but was more or less the only way who Napoleon was able to see for getting the English to a damned peace table).