Book Description
Critical acclaim for
Waterloo: New Perspectives The Great Battle Reappraised.
"[T]he most important study of the Waterloo Campaign to have appeared in print for 150 years." âThe Napoleonic Society of America.
"A meticulously detailed account of the Battle of Waterloo that sets right some of the errors and omissions of facts committed by earlier contemporary authors ârecommended." âLibrary Journal.
"A superior account of the campaignâfree of nationalist bias, thoroughly researched, and clearly written."âBooklist
"A thoughtful and dispassionate examination of the battle that brought Napoleon's power to an end ...a valuable addition to anyone's Napoleonic shelf." âThe Washington Times.
Customer Reviews:
Reappraises All Partcipants.......2006-10-10
This book provides an excellent account of the entire Waterloo campaign and not just the Battle of Waterloo itself. The author touches on the injustices created by Siborne's model & account of the battle that badly portrayed the non-British contingents of the Allied army. Unfortunately, Sibornes account became accepted as historical fact.
The book briefly covers the demise of Napoleon in 1814 (and the treachery of key people in this), his return, and the intriguing political manoeurving and squabbling amongst the Allies at the Congress of Vienna. It was perhaps Napoleon's misfortune that the Allied leaders or representatives were gathered in one place to reach agreement on what action to take against him.
The author gives a good account of the initial French thrust into Belgium and the twin battles of Ligny & Quatre Bras. The author shows that Wellington's slow reaction to the invasion could have cost him dearly if troops of the Netherlands did not decide on their own initiative to hold the position at Quatre Bras. Marshal Ney is given more credit than what normally is given to him in that he had very little time to familiarize himself with his forces & disposition, and that his forces were still closing up to be able to launch an early attack on the Quatre Bras cross roads. However, it was probably Napoleon's biggest errors in not totally confiding with his Marshals, ultimately leading to the mishandling of d'Erlon's troops (that could have decisively defeated the Prussians at Ligny) and delaying the decision to pursue the defeated Prussians. The author also emphasizes Napoleon seems handicapped by the lack of presence of his old Chief of Staff.
The Battle of Waterloo itself is well covered off and the author draws on various accounts and references of the battle. The author gives credit where it is due, especially the non-British Allied forces whose actions are well covered and explained and thereby dispelling many myths that have arisen. In fact, all participants in the campaign are given good coverage and evaluation. Overall, the book shows how closely fought the Battle of Waterloo was, and that d'Erlon's main assault almost succeeded in breaking Wellington's line (if it wasn't for the perfect timing of the British cavalry that was Uxbridge's brilliance not Wellington's). There has been much controversy over the use of French cavalry charges, but as the author points out, Napoleon had nothing else but with to maintain pressure on Wellington's line and this had worked previously at Eylau against the Russians.
The books tends to show there are key moments of decision or indecision that may win or lose a battle/campaign. e.g. Rebecque's & Perpocher's decision to hold Quatre Bras, the tussle for the use of d'Erlon's troops at Quatre Bras or Ligny, the Prussian retreat to Wavre rather than along their lines of communication and supply, the delay in the pursuit of the Prussians, the perfect timing of British cavalry, the delay in the use of the Guard, Steinmetz attack at the hinge of Napoleon's army etc. Hamilton-Williams sums up that Napoleon lost the battle but ultimately his downfall was caused by the treachery of Tallyerand and Fouche in Paris and Napoleon's refusal to use force to ensure his power was maintained.
I found this to be an indepth, well researched analysis of the Waterloo campaign and a thoroughly enjoyable one.
Justly Discredited or mere character assassination?.......2004-03-13
I purchased this book precisely because it is one one of the few volumes still in print with anything close to full coverage of the Waterloo campaign, and with more or less the least amount of identity politics. Despite all the author's plugging of his own books-to-come and his claims, which are a good deal too much for the dust jacket and all, the book collapses on simply being a reasonably accurate accurate account of (mostly) the battles of Quatre-Bras and Waterloo (among the French, British, and Dutch/German/Belgian allies). There simply isn't anything terribly new or controversial in his book and I disagree with Peter Hofschroer's remark about its content being thrown in doubt, all other issues with him notwithstanding. The content is still too derivative, too close to previous works and experience (the Siborne, for example) for that to be the case.
The interested reader is challenged to find another volume with the same amount of coverage of the Battle of Quatre-Bras, for example. The author, it appears in parts of the book, does not attempt as much coverage of those areas with which were not evidently well researched (The Prussian contibution, perhaps thus some of Mr Hofschroer's vitriolics). The author does indeed venture to make make his opinions and interpretations, some of which the reader has to take with a grain of salt, but that is his authorial prerogative. We see that Mr Hofschroer clearly enjoys his privilege as well. The author's account is, overall and despite the criticism, surprisingly balanced. The writing is usually good and entertaining. Hamilton-Williams account is by no means a "fiction." I still find his attempts a good deal more useful in guiding me a little closer to the truth than the massive omissions so common in other volumes still in print which purport to cover the Waterloo campaign.
Personally I am tired of hearing all the petty squabbling among historians, amateur and some (huh-hum) professional, over who really won Waterloo, and worse yet the endless bickering among pedantic source hunters. When the reader who has access to enough of the excellent volumes and materials on the subject becomes fairly expert enough, he or she can cross check the common stories, narratives, or sources of quotes, most often without having to be a source hunter. There is criticism, even polemics, and then there is character assassination. I have yet to find a reasonable published account which proves D. H-W deliberately falsified his written account anywhere of the Waterloo campaign. I will wait to hear the author defend himself first before I pass judgement.
Moreover, take with more than just a grain of salt the many unprofessional reviews made by one "Michael La Vean" on this and David Hamilton-Williams other page. They smack of cheap personal vendetta and not anything resembling reasonable criticism. One wonders if they were to research Mr La Vean's own claims (if that is his real name) as to his identity and credentials what would turn up, if anything. I do not believe that a fellow of the International Napoleonic society would engage in ceaseless juvenile ranting as he has done on this site, making such serious and unsupported claims of his own. Furthermore, his methods are of such a common variety internet persona that he almost seems as if to materialize again and again in the guise of a reader from West Point, or from Moscow, London, Brussels, or who knows what other place names with any relevence to matters of Napoleonic military history.
Justly Discredited or mere character assassination?.......2004-03-13
I purchased this book precisely because it is one one of the few volumes still in print with anything close to full coverage of the Waterloo campaign, and with more or less the least amount of identity politics. Despite all the author's plugging of his own books-to-come and his claims, which are a good deal too much for the dust jacket and all, the book collapses on simply being a reasonably accurate accurate account of (mostly) the battles of Quatre-Bras and Waterloo (among the French, British, and Dutch/German/Belgian allies). There simply isn't anything terribly new or controversial in his book and I disagree with Peter Hofschroer's remark about its content being thrown in doubt, all other issues with him notwithstanding. The content is too derivative, too close to common knowledge for that to be the case.
The interested reader is challenged to find another volume with the same amount of coverage of the Battle of Quatre-Bras, for example. The author, it appears in parts of the book, does not attempt as much coverage of those areas with which were not evidently well researched (The Prussian contibution, perhaps thus some of Mr Hofschroer's vitriolics). The author does indeed venture to make make his opinions and interpretations, some of which the reader has to take with a grain of salt, but that is his authorial prerogative. We see that Mr Hofschroer clearly enjoys his privilege as well. The author's account is, overall and despite the criticism, surprisingly balanced. The writing is usually good and entertaining. Hamilton-Williams account is by no means a "fiction." I still find his attempts a good deal more useful in guiding me a little closer to the truth than the massive omissions so common in other volumes which purport to cover the Waterloo campaign.
Personally I am tired of hearing all the petty squabbling among
historians, amateur and some (huh-hum) professional, over who really won Waterloo, and worse yet the endless bickering among pedantic source hunters. When the reader who has access to enough of the excellent volumes and materials on the subject becomes fairly expert enough, he or she can cross check the common stories, narratives, or sources of quotes, most often without having to be a source hunter.
There is criticism, even polemics, and then there is character
assassination. I have yet to find a reasonable published account
which proves D. H-W deliberately falsified his account anywhere of the Waterloo campaign, or deliberately falsified his sources. I will wait to hear the author defend himself first before I pass judgement.
Moreover, take with more than just a grain of salt the many
unprofessional reviews made by one "Michael La Vean" on this and
David Hamilton-Williams other page. They smack of cheap personal
vendetta and not anything resembling reasonable criticism. One
wonders if they were to research Mr La Vean's own claims (if that is his real name) as to his identity and credentials what would turn up, if anything. I do not believe that a fellow of the International Napoleonic society would engage in such juvenile ranting as he has done on this site, making such serious and unsupported claims of his own. Furthermore, his methods are of such a common variety internet persona that he almost seems as if to materialize again and again in the guise of a reader from West Point, or from Moscow, London, Brussels, or who knows what other place names with any relevence to
matters of Napoleonic military history.
New Perspectives Indeed - An Invaluable Account of Waterloo.......2003-12-26
Having read everything I can on the Waterloo battle I still find this book to be absolutely essential. I've read the critics who fault the author on many levels but I must say that he answers several questions that literally no other author has thus far addressed.
1) Why did Picton die crying, "Rally the Highlanders?" Were not the British lines indestructable?
2) How did a few companies of British Guards hold Hougamont against most of a French corps? After all, didn't the German and Nassau troops flee in terror? (see Jac Weller et al)
3) Why did the French Army fall apart and flee for their lives when the Middle Guard was repulsed, yet most could not see farther than twenty feet on the smoke filled battle field? Could it have had something to do with Ziethen's advance, ignored even in the otherwise excellent 'Waterloo Companion'?
4) Did Napoleon really lie about Grouchy's arrival - or did the attack by the Prussians on the Nassau forces on Wellington's left make him think Grouchy truly had arrived?
Until at least one other author addresses these questions I submit that Hamilton Williams is the man to read. Not to mention the fact that his commentary reads like an adventure story and his account of the battle is quite simply the best so far written by anyone.
The attacks on H-W by Peter Hofshroyer should also be taken with a large grain of salt. I was shocked by that until I realized htat H-W stole a march on him by getting to print first with what was certainly the first English language account of the battle to give proper credit to the Dutch Belgians, Prussians and various Germans.
This book belongs in any serious military history collection and truly does offer a "new perspective".
An Excellent Account.......2003-11-25
Even though the author's credibility is being questioned, his account of the battle should not be as easily ignored. One should always remember that historical "facts" are always tainted by those who write them. After all, it is usually the victor who writes of the battles and campaigns, and there always seems to be a political motivation in "sprucing" up of the truth.
I would suggest to anybody wishing to purchase the book to use one's best judgement. To truly be able to judge an author's work, one must remain open to all possible ideas and points of view. In the case of this book I would take it for what it is, and then proceed to further study the conflict, and then draw a conclusion.
I would not recommend a complete dismissal of this title. I just strongly suggest that the reader remember that to all points there is a counter, and not everybody will share the same opinion on any topic. The book is worth reading, because it causes people to think, and opens discussion about an issue that may never be resolved to anybody's satisfaction.
Book Description
A vivid human and military history of the legendary battle
At Waterloo, some 70,000 men under Napoleon and an equal number under Wellington faced one another in a titanic and bloody struggle. In the end, as John Keegan notes, contemporaries felt that Napoleon's defeat had "reversed the tide of European history." Even 190 years later, the name Waterloo resounds.
Italian historian Alessandro Barbero's majestic new account stands apart from previous British and French histories by giving voice to all the nationalities that took part. Invoking the memories of British, French, and Prussian soldiers, Barbero meticulously re-creates the conflict as it unfolded, from General Reille's early afternoon assault on the chateau of Hougoumont, to the desperate last charge of Napoleon's Imperial Guard as evening settled in. From privates to generals, Barbero recounts individual miracles and tragedies, moments of courage and foolhardiness, skillfully blending them into the larger narrative of the battle's extraordinary ebb and flow. One is left with indelible images: cavalry charges against soldiers formed in squares; the hand-to-hand combat around farmhouses; endless cannon balls and smoke. And, finally, a powerful appreciation of the inevitability and futility of war.
To be published on the 190th anniversary of Waterloo, The Battle is a masterpiece of military history.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent except for the maps.......2007-10-05
The translation from the Italian is outstanding. The work reads like a novel and the short chapters makes for an easy put up and down without losing track of the narrative.
The lack of adequate maps and diagrams is particularly irritating and keeps me from giving a five star rating. I kept going back from the text to the maps and not being able to find and follow the action on the ground from the text.
Like learning about the battle for the first time.......2007-05-29
Alessandro Barbero connects events and characters, with insights into the tactics of the time and the pyschological and physical impact they had on the troops, so neatly that I felt I understood the battle for the first time.
The experiences of the common soldiers are brought vividly to life, and the tactics and respective capabilities of the sides are discussed very perceptively. The various chapters about of cavalry and light infantry were particularly interesting. The Prussians and Grouchy are also dealt with more intelligently than I had come across before. Grouchy and Ney are both given more credit than usual, with cogent reasoning to back it up.
In the process, much of the accepted wisdom on Waterloo, particularly as drawn from Bonaparte's own self serving justifications, is overturned.
Excellent Throughout.......2007-05-10
Barbero does an outstanding job of detailing each step of this great battle, yet holds the reader's interest throughout. He is not afraid to explore conflicting accounts and considers each thoughtfully. He mixes recountings on the grand scale with chilling individual recollections from the battlefield in a recounting that holds the reader, one page at a time, afraid on the one hand to miss a paragraph and yet on the other held spellbound the entire way.
By the author of THE SWAN: Tales of the Sacramento Valley
WATERLOO REVISITED.......2007-03-09
I have read several books about the battle. This book is a great review of the events of the day. I found a few things that were new. The role of the Prince of Orange is an example. I believe that there is a benefit to having another (other than British) point of view. I always believed that Napolean's use of the Old Guard at the end of the day was an act of desperation,but this presents that attack in a different light. I understand the battle much more thoroughly after reading this and I recommend the book.
Masterpiece.......2006-08-19
This is an superb book that totally engages the reader and that not only provides a feel for what it was like to be on the field of battle, but also provides well researched counterpoints to previously accepted history. For example:
The attack(s)on Hougomount were not a wasted effort for although there were no more than two thousand men in the chateau , the total number of Allied foreces committed to this action was much higher.
Mouton did not in fact receive orders from Napoleon to cover the French right wing from the Prussians (as Napoleon maintains in his memoirs). Mouton's troops 'mission was to support the attack of d'Erlon's I Corps, and they were taken completely by surprise when the Prussians appeared on their flank.'
The great French cavalry charges could not have occurred without Napoleons explicit orders as the preparation was taking place only a few hundred yards from him.
The French cavalry was not a spent force after the great charges but remained an effective threat and gave effective support for the remainder of the battle.
The final attack by elements of the Guard was not carried out in sufficient numbers, but what in fact Napoleon was relying on was the psychological effect of the advance over his adversaries.
The French retreat was perhaps conducted more orderly than has been previously portrayed as no French Eagle was captured during the retreat despite the pursuing Prussians.
The book is almost written in the style of a novel and eloquently interweaves first hand accounts throughout but the author is still able to provide the grand strategy and new insights into the battle to keep the scholars happy. The author brilliantly covers the brutality, savagery and uncertainity of battle, that one feels as though they were present. The author also gives coverage to the aftermath of the battle, to the dying and wounded on the field and the unrelentless and revenge driven pursuit of the Prussians.
This has to be one of the best books on the Battle of Waterloo and gives all the partcipants impartial coverage. In fact, this is one of the strong aspects of this book. I became totally engrossed in this book and found it both enthralling and illuninating. Highly recommended reading!
Customer Reviews:
Wargamers & History Buffs Delight.......2005-06-10
This is a well written & easy to read book that covers Napoleons Waterloo Campaign. Being part of the Great Campaigns series of books it has lots of additional information in well laid out sidebars regarding the tactics, weapons, training, and major figures involved. Black and White maps are included and a very useful order of battle.
If you were to read just one book on this subject I would recommend this. I find that many books covering this period in history target other historians to try and prove some new point or other, as well as making the assumption that you can speak french!
Dr Nofi, thankfully, does not fall into these traps.
VALUABLE RESOURCE OF AN IMPORTANT CAMPAIGN.......2004-09-25
THE WATERLOO CAMPAIGN begins with Napoleon's return from exile in February 1815 to his defeat and final exile to St. Helena in August. The Waterloo campaign consisted of three major battles: Ligny, Quatre Bras and Waterloo. Mr. Nofi covers all three battles. He uses 16 maps to show troop positions at different times of the battles. His detailed narrative follows movements and combats of units on both sides, noting numbers of men and guns involved. What makes this book especially valuable is the complete order of battle provided in the appendices. Mr. Nofi also provides sidebar discussions of Napoleonic topics such as Musketry, The Horse at War, and Artillery of the Waterloo Campaign, and personalities such as Sir Thomas Picton, William, Prince of Orange and Michel Ney. This book had complete information for me to develop computer wargames based on the battles of Quatre Bras and Waterloo. In summary, THE WATERLOO CAMPAIGN is an excellent military history of an important campaign not only for the general reader but also for the serious student of history.
Book Description
A nineteenth-century Band of Brothers
The 95th Rifles was one of history's great fighting units, and Mark Urban brings them and the Napoleonic War gloriously to life in this unique chronicle. Focusing especially on six soldiers in the first battalion, Urban tells the Rifles’ story from May 25, 1809, when they shipped out to join Wellington’s army in Spain, through the battle of Waterloo in June 1815. Drawing on diaries, letters, and other personal accounts, Urban has fashioned a vivid narrative that allows readers to feel the thrill and horror of famous battles, the hardship of the march across Europe, the bravery and camaraderie of a nineteenthcentury Band of Brothers whose innovative tactics created the modern notion of infantryman.
Customer Reviews:
Almost as Exiting as a Richard Sharpe Novel!.......2007-10-04
This is a pacey history of the 95th Rifle Battalion from the commencement of their Peninsular Campaign through to the final climatic Battle of Waterloo. The Author draws on Letters etc from a number of Officers & other ranks to add a personal feel for the times.
Great battle descriptions & some very enlightening information on "Black Bob" the commander of the Light Division.
I would recommend this book to all history fans of the Napoleonic War & of the Sharpe TV & Book series.
Wellington's Rifles.......2007-01-06
This is a really good read! Granted I'm a Napoleonic buff, but this is the second book I've read by Mark Urban (The Man Who Broke Napoleon's Codes). I'm really impressed by the readability and detail of his work, and that does not always go together in non-fiction.
A Rifleman's View of the Peninsular War.......2006-11-13
Mark Urban's excellent "Wellington's Rifles" is an innovative history of the 95th Rifle Regiment and especially of its first battalion duirng 1809-1814 in the Peninsular War. Urban's comprehensive research into the memoires, diaries, and letters of members of the regiment during its time in Portugal and Spain has produced an account told from the point of view of the riflemen themselves. This account is very much analogous to Stephen Ambrose's "Band of Brothers" in exploring not only the battle history of the unit but also its internal chemistry and why it was consistently such an effective unit.
Urban paints an honest, warts and all picture of the First Battalion of the 95th. We meet its officers and soldiers under the best and worst of conditions, and find that the Rifles were composed of very normal human beings made into a nearly unbreakable unit by tough but effective training, good leadership, and a well-founded sense that they were special. At the same time, they were prone to the same challenges and temptations as other units. The 95th suffered hunger and cold at the distant end of supply lines, endured incredible marches over the primitive roads of Iberia, survived sometimes horrific wounds on the battlefield, and participated in less than honorable events such as the pillaging that followed the storming of Badajoz in 1812. Urban focuses on several individuals who served for extended periods in the Peninsular War, providing a thread of continuity through the account.
The 95th represented a departure from the standard tactics of the era, of units maneuvering and firing in mass. The Rifles were trained to fight in extended order as light infantry and were issued the Baker Rifle, which made them deadly effective individual sharpshooters at much greater range than their infantry counterparts. As Urban makes clear in his epilogue, the Rifles were the precusor to the modern infantry units of the British and American armies.
This book is very highly recommended to students of the history of the British Army and to students of the military art.
The Real Riflemen.......2006-11-02
Having read just about every Sharpe book by Bernard Cornwell, I wanted to learn about the real 95th Rifles. Mark Urban wrote a readable history of the Rifles, and throughout the book also focused on several individual Riflemem. I do wish, however, that he had drawn some maps of the battles rather than use unreadable copies of old maps.
Wonderful and Informative.......2006-04-19
I freely admit that I'm not some Napoleonic expert who keeps a sabre next to my desk & a shako on my mantle. I've been a fan of Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe series for years. I kept meaning to start reading books on the actual Peninsula Campaign and it just so happens this is the first book. That was great luck because this book is wonderful.
Mark Urban keeps the focus extremely narrow. He talks about the Rifle's involvement in the Peninsula and Waterloo and not much else. Huge battles and huge sections of battles are ignored because the 95th just wasn't there. This almost obessive focus results in undiluted information. You get a sense of what it was really like to serve & fight based on great research and fantastic writing. The way he tracked certain personalities across the years gave the book a "story" to hang it's information from. It all worked out to be an enjoyable read that was just dripping with good information.
The reality of the 95th's existence was as interesting, if not more so, than Cornwell's Sharpe. If you're a fan, you need to read this.
Book Description
Waterloo holds a special place among the great battles of history. The climax of more than twenty years of war, it was indeed a close-run affair, matching two of the world's greatest generals - Napoleon and Wellington. This volume covers the entire campaign including the battles of Quatre Bras, Ligny and Wavre, with five full-colour maps and three highly detailed bird's eye views showing decisive moments in the action. An excellent sense of the closeness of the battle is communicated - Wellington himself claimed it was "the nearest thing you ever saw in your life" - and this gripping account shows the full justice of that statement.
Customer Reviews:
Not helpful.........2007-03-10
I don't know much about the Battle of Waterloo. I bought this book to help me learn a little about it. It really wasn't much help. The pictures were good but that's about it. Osprey has many excellent books but this isn't one of them.
Rather prefunctory, good maps competent over all.......2006-10-08
The campaign title that concerns Waterloo is prefunctory in its explanation of the battle and the events leading up to it. It includes a nice section on the battlefield today etc... While the book is heavily illustrated it relies on rather imprecise old paintings rather than what would have been better in my view, namely uniform plates coinciding with the different French and Allied units that faced off on the battlefield.
strongly pro-British.......2005-11-08
Really nothing new, just repeat of many tall-tales.
By the way, why "Birth of Modern Europe" ? What is so modern about Europe shortly after 1815 ? Kings and emperors divide Euorope in the old way. Russia, England and Prussia again enlarged their territories.
Waterloo Campaign.......2001-12-04
I enjoyed this book. I dont think it is overly Pro-Brit - the author gives plenty of credit to both French and Prussians where it is due. He also clearly states that without Blucher Wellington could not have won. Its a very good blow-by-blow text of the battle. However, it is also more than that. You get the bonus of the lead up battles prior to Waterloo itself, all done in detail, and an excellent set of battlefield tours at the end. I was really glad I took the book with me when I walked the battlefield some time ago. This must be one of Ospreys biggest offerings in the series, and for the money it really cant get any better than this!! The author goes into a lot of tactical and other precise details that I havent found in other texts, and I thought the 3D terrain map illustrations were superb. You can really see how the battle shaped up. The only thing I would like to have seen was some new uniform plates. The ones here come directly from their men at arms series. That said, there is lots of excellent stuff here, it's very nicely written, and well worthy of inclusion in a collection. I have several titles in the Campaign series, and Waterloo is definitely my favourite so far.
The most wrtten-about battle in the history of mankind.......2001-10-23
No battle has been more written about than Waterloo or studied by military historians. Nevertheless I enjoyed this book as it was very clear , but as in the case of some of the other reviewers, I agree that there is a strong British bias. The British were close to defeat and it is the Prussian General Blucher who could be called the real victor of Waterloo. I enjoyed the part of the book which described Napoleon's charismatic personality .
Average customer rating:
- Fascinating work for the serious reader
- Standard text for good reason
|
History of the Waterloo Campaign (Napoleonic Library)
William Siborne
Manufacturer: Greenhill Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Belgium
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| France
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Strategy
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Napoleonic Wars
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Napoleon
| Napoleonic Wars
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Waterloo
| Napoleonic Wars
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Military Science
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
ASIN: 1853670693 |
Customer Reviews:
Fascinating work for the serious reader.......2001-04-13
Siborne's history provides one of the most detailed accounts of Waterloo from the English perspective, and is the must-read book for anyone with a serious interest in the battle and campaign. I emphasize campaign, because the book also describes the often ignored aftermath of Waterloo, when the French tried to hold off the invading Prussian and and Anglo-Allied armies.
This book contains a wealth of information not found in the general Waterloo histories, including an analysis of Napoleon's actions that lead you to believe his campaign was lost on the first day. It also describes in fascinating detail the repulse of the final Old Guard assault, and the ensuing retreat of the French. While most histories lead you to believe that the repulse turned into an instant rout, Siborne instead paints the action after the Guard's defeat as a series of continual Allied attacks and French defensive actions.
Having said that, this is not the book for first-time Waterlooeans. Siborne's writing style is 18th-century florid at its worst. The prose is truly difficult to dig through at times. Also, the wealth of detail may be too much for readers not terribly familar with the battle. Readers not familiar with Waterloo should start with one of the more accessible histories, such as David Howarth's "Waterloo: A Near Run Thing," David Chandler's "Waterloo: The Hundred Days," or the Osprey series book on the battle. Siborne's work then provides an excellent next step for those wishing to delve further into this ever intriguing battle.
Standard text for good reason.......1999-03-31
Siborne's History, first published in the 1840's, has stood the test of time and remains a standard text on the 1815 Campaign, and with good reason.
His work was controversial from the day of its publication and still attracts controversy today. Despite claims to the contrary made by some on its publication and others in recent books, Siborne conducted very careful research into the subject, consulted not only all the published authorities available, but conducted correspondence with many leading survivors of the battle and campaign. This correspondence has been preserved and can be viewed in the British Library today.
Siborne based his research on Dutch and German authorities. There are clear indications that he referred to the works by Löben-Sels, Damitz, Plotho, etc. He conducted correspondence with the Prussian General Staff and made every effort to write a balanced History.
A number of letters from participating British officers appeared in the "United Services Journal". These were often complaints about Siborne's description of their unit's participation in the Battle of Waterloo. Reference to Siborne's unpublished "Correspondence" shows that he made every effort to establish the credibility of his witnesses' statements and that his version was generally the more likely. He did not make many friends here.
The Prussian General Staff however took a more positive approach to his History, writing an extensive review of it in the "Militair-Wochenblatt".
Certain members of the British establishment, notably the Duke of Wellington, took a dislike to Siborne, whom they regarded as "too pro-Prussian" for their liking. Certain of Wellington's associates, particularly the Earl of Ellesmere, using false information provided by the Duke, conducted a smear campaign against Siborne. The full story of this denigration has yet to be told.
In short, Siborne's work is a classic for very good reasons.
Book Description
Histories of the Waterloo campaign and tours of the battlefield generally concentrate on the battle between the armies of Napoleon and Wellington - the role of Blucher's Prussians is left in the background. Peter Hofschoer's fascinating account focuses on the Prussians at the Battle of Waterloo and on their critical but often neglected contribution to the battle. He tells the story of the grueling Prussian advance towards the battlefield and he records the ferocious and decisive fight that broke out when they arrived. At every stage he allows the reader to follow in the footsteps of the Prussian soldiers as they struggled across the Belgian countryside almost 200 years ago.
Average customer rating:
- A short but amazing narrative of Waterloo from a non-combatants point of view
|
Lady De Lancey at Waterloo: A Story of Duty and Devotion
David Miller
Manufacturer: Spellmount Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Irish
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Historical
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
| British
| Canadian
| General
| Holocaust
| United States
General
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
19th Century
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ireland
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Napoleonic Wars
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Waterloo
| Napoleonic Wars
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
19th Century
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 1862270821 |
Book Description
The intriguing and fully authenticated story of the British Army's first professional staff officer, his beautiful Scottish bride and their doomed marriage. It includes the full text of both the 'Narrative' and the little-known 'Abridged Version', originally titled 'A Week At Waterloo in 1815 - Lady de Lancey's Narrative: being an account of how she nursed her husband, Colonel Sir W H Lancey, Quartermaster General of the Army, who was mortally wounded in the great battle'.
Customer Reviews:
A short but amazing narrative of Waterloo from a non-combatants point of view.......2005-09-06
This is one of the best stories avaialable about Waterloo and its aftermath and it is from the wife of one of the officers in the battle. It is the true story of Madalene DeLancey's Week at Waterloo and I am forever indebted to David Miller who found this incredibly hard to find book and added footnotes and narrative detail to what was a very thin story.
Madalene was encouraged to write this story much later - and so it is done from memory rather than diaries and letters, but the detail is extraodinary. It was shown to Charles Dickens who wept over it. Her writing is very moving. It lacks deliberate pathos and yet it is so moving. She had married only a few months prior to battle of Waterloo and her husband had been called to serve at the last minute, they arrived in Belgium just days before the battle began and her husband was immediately swept into the organisation.
The army was called up on the 15th and marched to Ligny and Quatrebras where the first battles took place. Back in the town no one knew what was happening, the dithering, the panic, the rumours, the deserters galloping through town are all revealed in her narrative.
The most gut-wrenching part is when she finds out her husband has been injured - she hears numerous stories rumours and half-confirmed details until she finally tracks him down, injured near the battlefield. She then must nurse him.
I find myself crying even as I write this review. The story had such an enormous impact. Miller has done a fantastic job of providing detail to throw light on it, without detracting from its power.
One of the best books I have read 5 stars +
A Woodley
Book Description
Previously unpublished eyewitness accounts and battle reports German, British, and Dutch archive material published for the first time Controversial reassessment of the whole campaign Here is a unique reassessment of the Hundred Days and a powerful analysis of the epic confrontation at Waterloo. The first of two volumes, this study is a thoroughly researched examination of the opening moves of the campaign from a new perspective based on evidence never before presented to an English-speaking audience. Hofschrer arrives at far-reaching conclusions about the controversial theory that the Duke of Wellington deceived his Prussian alliesand all subsequent historians of the campaign. By presenting events from the perspective of the Germans, the author undermines the traditional view of the campaign as one fought out by the French and the British and reveals the crucial role of troops from Prussia and the German states.
Customer Reviews:
German victory at Waterloo.......2007-03-17
Peter Hofschroer is by no means alone in his effort to set the historical record straight about Waterloo. Alessandro Barbero, professor at Piedmont University, makes it very clear in his book "The Battle, a New History of Waterloo," that Wellington was at the brink of being trounced by Napoleon when Bluecher came to his rescue and defeated the French. The British version of this historical battle misrepresents these facts. It celebrates Wellington as the great field marshal who saved Europe, when in fact it was Bluecher's forces that put an end to Napoleon's ambitions of a French dominated continent.
A nice change but to one sided to be an all rounder.......2001-12-09
This book is strong in its detailing of Prussian action, strong in investigating any mistakes that the British may have made but like most axe-grinders weak in describing anything that upsets his theory.
I can name countless examples of minor 'attitude' mistakes which include such delights as Prussia mistaken for Germany ( it is not a foregone conclusion that a greater Germany would form at this point and a lot of the Germans appear to hate Prussia anyhow but of course if the forces were split by country then the author would not be able to produce his tabloid headline to sell his book tsk tsk )
A complete refusal to view Prussian attitudes for what they were - example Prussia starts mobilising for war AGAINST Britain,Autstria and France ( because Britain still invlolved against america) 2 days AFTER these 3 make a secret defensive alliance and the author states how horrified Prussia was at this terrible action????? bizarre attitude.
French aggression is frequently mentioned yet Napoleon only actually started 2 wars ( however many he 'helped' ) and Prussian eagerness to avenge the 'Sufferings' on their nation are even more frequently mentioned yet its fairly clear that revenge for the embarrasment of losing was more of a motivating factor.
The most obvious and regretable part of the book lies in his ignoring of any evidence that counters his claim. A major example lies in his statement that Bourmonts defection made no difference to the campaign as the Prussians knew all Napoleons plans anyway. No mention is made of the fact ( bar a sentance later commenting on Gerards late arrival ) that he commanded the advance division of Gerards corps and his disappearance delayed Gerard almost half a day and that had this defection not occured the early engagement at Gilly would have been lost and Ligny would have started earlier and hence the campaign would probably have been lost. I know Historians should avoid what ifs but this statement is obviously ignored because it removes glory from the magnificent Prussian rear guard action.
On a positive note his description of the battles themselves are superb and well written and his destruction of Wellingtons attempts to cover his early mistakes in the campaign that caused the Prussian defeat are well documented and eye-opening ( Wellington shows himself to be almost a good a propagandist as Napoleon ) it is just a shame that his lack of accuracy whenever anything might tarnish the glory of Prussian arms and to quote his own book (replace de Ros with the author ;) )"if de Ros's account is inaccurate regarding this final comment, can it be trusted at all"
A Refreshing viewpoint.......2000-10-28
This book along with the second volume " The German Victory" seems to have touched a nerve ending among many readers.
The book covers the overall situation in Europe before Waterloo, the fragile coalition between the Allies, the fighting around Carleroi, Franses and of course the dual batlles of Ligny and Quatre Bras. Peter Hofschroer writes almost entirely from a Prussian perspective which is refreshing but at times a little frustrating (as I would have liked a bit more French input). He tries to convince the reader that the Waterloo Campaign was more of a German/Prussian victory than a British one based on the make up and numbers of the Allied forces that actually fought in the campaign. He also pulls no punches on the Duke of Wellington's performance in the opening rounds of the campaign and concludes from the evidence of his research that the Duke deceived his Prussian Allies into fighting at Ligny when he knew he could not offer any support.
I enjoyed reading this book which I found to be thoroughly researched and thought provoking and also made good use of maps. Peter Hofschroer has certainly come up with an interesting alternative view point which may polarize the way many people view how the Waterloo Campaign was won.
Vorwarts, Deutschland!.......2000-07-06
All authors, historians, and enthusiasts have their bias, prejudices, and favorite subjects. This is no secret, but it does not stop the conscientious researcher/historian from printing both 'good' and 'bad' information in a study, paper, or book.
Let me pause here to say, in all fairness, that the author and I have corresponded obliquely on different Napoleonic topics, and we neither agree nor do we get along. That, however, has nothing to do with the merits of this volume.
This book does concentrate on the Prussians, and other Germans, but it does so warts and all. Perhaps it is high time somebody does, for if the Prussians hadn't arrived on the field, Wellington would have been beaten, he as much as admitted it later. The author has no problem discussing unpleasant topics, such as the Saxon mutiny against the Prussians before the 1815 campaign began. His research is meticulous, he presents his subject very well, and he is enthusiastic about it, shcih to me is very important.
I was somewhat disturbed by the vehemence and prejudice that some of the reviews here have expressed. This book, and its sequel, have much to say, have been well-researched, and belong in every Napoleonic enthusiast's bookcase. This isn't 'revisionist history' in the sense that it is trying to change results or that it is making something up. It is a valiant attempt at deeper research that has succeeded, and succeeded quite well. This book, and its companion, have set a benchmark that all subsequent works on the subject will have to meet.
Looking at history - fact or Sharpe?.......2000-04-27
I have to admit to knowing Peter Hofschroer for about 20 years,but then we all have our crosses to bear! Seriously, in all the timeI have known him, Peter has been a stickler for accuracy and sourcing. I also have little interest in Waterloo per se, but that probably qualified me to look over the drafts. Peter took on board what was said by myself and others. The end result - and it came as no surprise to anyone who has looked at the Continental material on any Napoleonic campaign - is that a few porkies have been told, things have been distorted and many stories have turned up, which transpire to be based even on documents and stories which first surface years after the event. Closer examination of the regularly repeated tales then shows the clear inconsistencies. So, back we have to go to the original documentation in so far as it exists (and obviously some has gone missing). This was the task Peter set about in the wake of the Hamilton-Williams fiasco. Given HW, I was surprised that one ardent reviewer from Raleigh (who doesn't give his name) describes Peter's book as "amateur historiography that is sadly common in Napoleonic period: long on "data" and short on meaningful synthesis." I suggest he looks at much of the current output on the period. There any reader will find in fact a lot of books that are extremely short on data and long on meaningful synthesis - ie: copying out the more colourful accounts from one side with little hard, checked evidence, the vacuous gaps being filled with something owing its origins more to Sharpe than historical work. It never ceases to amaze me how, 200 years on, there is so much material that hasn't made it into English. Above all, Peter's contribution is to show the Prussian angle, which doesn't appear much anywhere else in English! Only when we have meaningful data can we draw any conclusions. I agree that it is time we had the full French view of these events (Bernard Coppens is giving us plenty on Waterloo itself, but I am sure there is plenty more). Inevitably, in what is an analytical work, the detail can get rather complex and even tedious, but if it wasn't there, wouldn't the criticism be that the author had failed to make his case? You are on a no-win with this. Peter was actually advised by myself and others that getting too bogged in the political run-up would overcomplicate his case and perhaps put off the Sharpe-battle narrative readers, Peter has made his case and like all theories, it must be tested and examined as it makes its way forward. Given the huge numbers of books that appear on Waterloo, it will be interesting to see what follows. Even if you disagree with the conclusions, it should be read if only so that the reader is aware that there is more than the "received wisdom". However, for all those who say Peter is too pro-German , doesn't Wellington come out of rather well, as he was clever enough to put a few over on those daft Prussians and then fool the British too! I'll give it 4-stars to show I am not Peter. END
Book Description
The first shots were fired at about eleven-thirty on a Sunday morning in June, 1815; by nine o'clock that night, forty thousand men lay dead or wounded, and Napoleon had abandoned not only his army, but all hope of recovering his empire. From the recollections of the men who were there, esteemed author David Howarth has recreated the battle as it appeared to them on the day it was fought. He follows the fortunes of men of all ranks and on both sides. But it is on the French side that the mysteries remain. Why did Ney attack with cavalry alone? And was Napoleon's downfall really due to the minor ailment he suffered that day? Beautifully written, vivid, and unforgettable, this illuminating history is impossible to put down.
Customer Reviews:
Secondary Source That Reads Like A Primary Source.......2007-04-28
"Waterloo: A Near Run Thing" by David Howarth.
Phoenix Paperback, London, Orion Books Ltd, 1968 and paperback in 2003.
In a large chain bookstore, I noticed this paperback in the "History" section near the World War II offerings; the book made me recall my European History professor who stated that most of us would remember Waterloo as the "Big Battle", in France, early 19th Century, which ended the comeback of Emperor Napoleon. Of course, using the common mistake as a lead-in, the professor said that the Battle of Waterloo was in Belgium, not France, and then wandered off on how Belgium had suffered through so many big battles, including the Battle of the Bulge, 1944. So, from a sense of duty, despite the original 1968 copyright date, I purchased this book and I was not disappointed. Exceptional writing.
David Howarth, (1912-1991), was an excellent writer of History. In "Waterloo", Howarth has drawn upon sources (almost two centuries' old), and fashioned the comments of the ordinary British soldiers and officers into a fresh and life-like accounting of the day, 18 June 1815.
It was as if you were standing alongside the soldier in the British square awaiting the charge of the French cavalry. The author has made the events of that June 1815 sparkling new on the paperback pages. In my humble opinion, you should be aware that the author favors the British point of view. Of course, the title, "A Near Run Thing" is a British idiom, indicating that point of view. The author raises the question of Napoleon's supposed illness on that fateful day; what was wrong with him? However, I am still looking for a book which gives better or full credit to the Prussian Field Marshall Bloucher (I still do not know how to get the Amazon word processor to put in umlauts), and his Prussian soldiers in their black uniforms with white facings. In any event, Waterloo WAS a great victory for the allies, ending the ambitions of Napoleon, and freeing Europe from the dominance of France. The Duke of Wellington played a key role in the triumph, but if the Prussians had not arrived when they had....
Don't let the copyright date of almost 40 years ago throw you off; this book is worth the purchase price.
A Waterloo for Everyone.......2005-12-31
This is a brilliant book. David Howarth captured the great story of what it was really like at one of the most important events of history. He is unbiased and fair. His characters draw and compel you through the story. It is a book that I could not put down. I highly recommend it to everyone.
A great read.......2005-09-27
This is a very interesting and well written book - it brings to life the battle itself. I would have liked more on the defence by the Young Guard,but overall well worth it.
A Masterful Telling of a Great Battle.......2005-04-17
While browsing the shelves I came across Howarth's book on Waterloo. Two hours later I felt that I had been an eye witness to history.
Of all the books I have read on Waterloo, Howarth's writing style and description come closest to the actual battle. His use of soldier's diaries in the telling brings home the actual chaos of that day, along with the twisting turns of fortune culminating in the charge of the Old Guard. This is one for the shelves!
As if you had been there on that day.......2005-03-07
Books about great battles typically describe events from a helicopter perspective, with little interest for how it was in reality for the soldiers on the ground. This book takes the opposite approach : taking the actual experience of a small number of real soldiers, mostly on Wellington's side, and weaving these together into a coherent story, Howarth has written a much more vivid picture of this very special battle.
The battle lends itself to this sort of approach : it was fought on a compact battlefield, less than 5 square miles, between up to 150,000 soldiers for 9 hours and it was so bloody that it took one hundred years, until the hundred miles long front in France in World War I, for as many man to fall in a single day. Also, the battle was truly a near run thing, and, if Napoleon had had a better day, things could have turned out very different. Howarth is particularly good at describing almost graphically how the fate of the battle hung in a balance, swinging between sides during the day on several occasions.
I have visited the Waterloo battlefield a number of times and read several books about it. None describes the battle as well how it must have been for the soldiers, including the deafening noise - it was claimed the cannon noise was heard as far away as Kent in England - , the smells, the damp cold, the pain - one French soldier, having just had his leg amputated, brandishes it in the air shouting "vive l'Empereur". Yet, there is a clear thread in the individual experiences which adds up to a good description of the battle. Granted, the battle is seen mostly through British soldiers' eyes, it is not clear how the crucial attack by the Garde Imperiale suddenly falters and the Prussians' assault in Placenoit is referred to as by "a few Prussians", this is still the best book I have read about this battle.
And it is short (a key criterion for a good book)
Books:
- Way of the Peaceful Warrior: A Book That Changes Lives
- Who Moved My Cheese? An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life
- Wisdom of the Mystic Masters
- World of Warcraft Dungeon Companion
- 50 Fast Final Cut Express Techniques
- 500 Five Minute Games: Quick and Easy Activities for 3-6 Year Olds
- A Child Called "It": One Child's Courage to Survive
- A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1)
- A Guidebook to Waking the Dead: Embracing the Life God Has for You
- A New View of Comparative Economics with Economic Applications Card and InfoTrac College Edition
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Introduction to Management Science
- Co-Active Coaching, 2nd Edition: New Skills for Coaching People Toward Success in Work and, Life
- Thematic And Methodological Foundations Of Alfred Hitchcock's Artistic Vision
- Triumphs And Tragedies: Corregidor And Its Aftermath
- A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Third Edition
- Breakfast, Lunch, Tea: The Many Little Meals of Rose Bakery
- Apple Pro Training Series: Advanced Color Correction and Effects in Final Cut Pro 5
- Crisis, Stabilization and Growth - Economic Adjustment in Transition Economies
- The World Trading System - 2nd Edition: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations
- Zeke and Ned
The Battle: A New History of Waterloo
Napoleon and Wellington: The Battle of Waterloo--and the Great Commanders Who Fought It
