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
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
This best-selling, authoritative, and accessible study of the epic confrontation at Waterloo is now available for the first time in paperback. The armies of the period are brought to life and the battles recreated from the viewpoint of both Wellington and Napoleon. Every move and counter-move in this sweeping campaign is charted, from Napoleon's dramatic offensive and the opening battles of Ligny and Quatre Bras, to the hard pounding at Waterloo itself. Valuable to both historian and general reader, this guided tour of the battle includes all the key features of the terrain, and brings out the drama and tragedy of battle.
Customer Reviews:
Classic Waterloo Study.......2007-09-19
This was the second of Jac Weller's three volume studies on the generalship and tactics of Wellington. The Iron Duke is certainly the author's hero, and some of his praise can get a bit heavy at times. One must keep in mind that this work was done many years ago when most books on the Napoleonic Wars were diehard Vive L'Emporeur! I think Weller wanted to go a bit in the opposite direction here.
While the narrative is pro-British for sure, the author does give his due to some of the various allied troops that comprised the Duke's army, and to the Prussians as well. Recent studies have tended to reject some of the older works like this one with their reliance on English language sources of the time. Still, there can be no doubt that Wellington represented a unique and totally different kind of opponet for the Emperior.
Napolean was a master strategist, no doubt. His initial movements for the 1815 campaign came close to achieving his goals. Napolean's genius was in gettinng his army concentrated with superior force at the right point. This he nearly achieved at Waterloo. Tactically, the emperior usually left the actual fighting of his battles to the skills of his marshals. This combination worked very well in all the past great campaigns of 1800-1812 or so. By 1815 most of the great marshals were no longer with the grande armee. Soult was to prove an inadequate Chief of Staff, while Ney was given too much resonsibility. Oddly enough Weller gives a lot of Praise to Ney's efforts on the battlefield, going against many who believed he lost the battle for Napolean.
Wellington was a master tactician. Napolean had taken a more active part in his battles in years past, but by 1815 this was no longer so. The Iron Duke knew how to use terrian and troops to a very high degree. Napolean had just not encountered this level of skill before on the battlefield.
What makes this a unique work is the fact the Weller does not waste a lot of time on discussion of the campaign itself. This he leaves to the many other books out there on the Waterloo campaign. He choses to concentrate on the actual tactical fighting, and what formations both sides employed. While some over-emphasis might be given on the methods of the French colume assaults, Weller makes an interesting point that after the inital set-back of D'Erlon's Corps, the French reverted to fighting tirailleur en-masse. A throw-back to when they did so early in the 1790s. This is a very interesting observation on how the French fought tactically at Waterloo. While Wellington's bastions of Hougamont and Le Haye Sainte sucked in disproportionate amounts of French troops, the mass tirailleur fire nearly caused a crisis in Wellington's center just before the arrival of the Prussians and the final attack of the French Guard.
Weller shows how Wellington responded to each development with the right response and shows that his skill truly was in tactical matters. The only problem here was if Wellington had been killed in any of those tactial situations, the whole Anglo-allied army would have been in dire straights. Weller fails to comment on this aspect of Wellington's personal generalship. The Iron Duke did not trust anyone to do things correctly, and he usually saw fit to be on hand himself. Wellington's skill at being where the crisis of the battle most needed him could well have cost his army dearly if he had been hit in any way. There simply was no one to take his place. The hand of Providence was certainly with him that day.
All in all Weller provides us with a classic tactical study of Waterloo from the British perspective. Readers today won't get a better nuts and bolts narrative in that regard. To balance out Weller's hero worship of Wellington and the thin red line, just have Chandler on hand, and some of the more recent studies that throw light on the contributions of the Dutch-Belgian and German troops. The book also gives some fine descriptions of the battlefield in recent times, and what to see if one ever goes there. I can honestly say from my own visit there that this book holds up well in that regard. Diagrams and orders of battle in the addenda provide added interest and detail for the dedicated reader. A classic study that anyone interested in the final battle of the Napeolonic Wars should have on their shelf.
An oldie-but-goodie.......2007-09-03
I read this book 30 years ago when I was in college. Later, when I was fortunate enough to tour the Waterloo battlefield, this book helped me understand where and how the major events of the battle took place.
As it's title indicates, this book revolves around Wellington. Weller describes the battle as if it were a chess game. Napoleon made a move; Wellington made an even better counter-move. If the Anglo-Allies made any mistakes it was because the Prince of Orange issued some moronic order. In a general way this may not have been too far from the truth. Of course, any battle involving nearly 200,000 men trying to kill one another is much more chaotic than that.
This criticism aside, this is an excellent book by a careful historian. Certainly, explaining the battle from Wellington's point of view is useful since all the average private soldier usually saw during the battle was the shako of the man in front of him. Weller carefully explains each stage of the battle, including the French "tirailleurade," which is not often noted in other accounts of the battle and which came perilously close to breaking the Anglo-Allied line. I highly recommend this oldie-but-goodie for anyone interested in Napoleonic military history.
Well researched, well written.......2005-02-10
There have been many outstanding books written about the Battle of Waterloo and the Duke of Wellington. The strength of Weller's book is that he synthesizes all of these sources into a very readable narrative of Wellington's actions in Waterloo.
The book focuses mostly on Wellington. It has some excellent chapters on what led up to the battle, the organization of the armies, and most importantly battlefield tactics and strategy. He then spends several chapters (maybe half the book) on the battles of Quatre Bras and Waterloo. He also has a chapter dedicated to raising and either debunking or supporting criticisms that other historians have raised about the performance of the British, Prussian, and French armies.
Jac Weller was clearly passionate about Wellington. He spent many days walking over the battlefields to put his research into better perspective. He included many maps and pictures, though the pictures are grainy black and whites that probably date for the 60s. I've been to Waterloo several times since the early 90s, and I'd expect that Weller would find the area significantly changed from when he wrote this book. His last chapter is basically his recommendation for a walking tour of the battlefields. My guess is that most of what he recommends can't be followed today.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Bernard Cornwell has written many books about the British Army of this time period in his Sharpe series. Quoting from his website, "[t]here are plenty of good books on Wellington's battles and campaigns, but these three [includes Weller's books on Peninsular War and India], I think, belong on the shelf of anyone who takes a serious interest in the Napoleonic wars." I agree.
An account of Waterloo for the Wellington fan.......2005-01-17
Jac Weller's "Wellington at Waterloo" is the third volume of a trilogy covering Wellington's military experiences in the Napoleonic era. It is best read as part of that trilogy. Weller writes in clear, easy to understand, and usually entertaining prose. He has an excellent grasp of the importance of terrain, and writes better than most about the details of tactics and weapons. His understanding of Wellington enables him to provide a narrative of the conduct of the Battle of Waterloo from Wellington's changing perspective as commander over time. This perspective allows Weller to impose order on the chaos of the battlefield for the general reader. Be warned that Weller was an unabashed fan of Wellington and wastes very little ink on the various academic controversies about the battle. Diehard fans of the military genius of Napoleon should seek elsewhere. Weller breaks no new ground with this book; his interpretation follows standard lines. Those looking for an entertaining and understandable narrative of the battlefield should find this a good read.
Detailed view from unique perspective.......2004-08-06
This book is neither an attempt at comprehensive coverage of the campaign leading to Waterloo nor meant as an exhaustive study of the battle itself. If one wishes to study either the campaign or the battle more broadly, or more fully, other works by other authors will better serve. But criticism of Mr. Weller's book for its narrow focus on the battle from Wellington's viewpoint would at best be a misreading of the author's intent, since as Bob Burnham's cogent review points out, Mr. Weller wrote this book primarily to give readers an understanding of Wellington's probable view of the battle as the Iron Duke experienced it on foot and horseback, in real time, under field conditions, in 1815 (...).In my opinion Mr. Weller not only largely succeeds in achieving that very specific and limited goal, but also gives a singularly edifying and pleasurable opportunity to learn details of the terrain and buildings of the battlefield as they were when it was fought, and to view the site and structures as extant in the late 1950's and early 1960's. I found descriptions of the battlefield's key elements by Mr. Weller, and the ground-level and airborne photos in his book, greatly informed my visit to Waterloo in 1971, and enhanced my ability to grasp the references made to these same features by other authors.
In conclusion, do not buy this book as either your introduction to the history of the battle or as a definitive and bias-free reference to the whole of the campaign. But do buy this book if you wish a very unique assist unavailable from any other work I'm familiar with per visualizing the "where" and "what" of the battlefield in 1815, and thereby improving your ability to judge for yourself regarding the when and why postulated by other authors for choices made by the various commanders, or the physical events of the battle falling out as they did.
Product Description
Authoritative, accessible study of the epic confrontation at Waterloo. The armies of the period are brought to life and the battles recreated from the viewpoint of both Wellington and Napoleon. Every move and counter-move in this sweeping campaign is charted, from Napoleon's dramatic offensive and the opening battles of Ligny and Quatre Bras, to the hard pounding at Waterloo itself. Valuable to both historian and general reader, this guided tour of the battle includes all the key features of the terrain, and brings out the drama and tragedy of battle. Abundantly illustrated.
Book Description
With Wellington's Light Cavalry - Campaigning with the 16th Light Dragoons in the Peninsular and Waterloo Campaigns of the Napoleonic Wars. A cavalryman's story that could have ended before it began. In the first chapter Tomkinson and his 16th Light Dragoons rashly charge into the rearguard of the French Army and he is shot and bayoneted. But in 1810 Tomkinson is once again in Spain fighting the French. This book is a fine example of a personal account filled with personal and unit detail combined with a clear and informative narrative of the campaigns in which the writer was engaged. A substantial read by any standards, the final 55 pages are devoted to Tompkinson's first hand experience of the 1815 campaign culminating in Napoleon's downfall at Waterloo.
Amazon.com
Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington, spent a lot of time worrying about whether Napoleon Bonaparte, the emperor of France, was a gentleman. Napoleon accused his English foe of being a coward. Yet, Andrew Roberts shows in this dual biography, each accorded the other an odd respect, and, like wrestlers in a ring, studied his foe's moves intently all the way to their fateful encounter at Waterloo.
Publicly, Bonaparte and Wellington professed to despise each other. "Even in the boldest things he did there was always a measure of ... meanness," said Wellington of the French emperor, adding later, "Bonaparte's whole life, civil, political, and military, was a fraud." Napoleon said that Wellington "has no courage. He acted out of fear. He had one stroke of fortune, and he knows that such fortune never comes twice." Yet the two, writes Roberts, were very much alike: social outsiders who found their greatness in the army, scholars of a sort, who brought scientific rigor to the study of topography and logistics, and men capable of inspiring great heroism in their soldiers.
In the end, Roberts suggests, Wellington won his battle, but Napoleon won the war. This intriguing study shows how, and it affords much insight into the workings of these great rivals' minds. --Gregory McNamee
Book Description
An award-winning historian offers an eye-opening view of the relationship between Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington, whose lives moved inexorably to their meeting at Waterloo, one of the most famous battles of all time.
At breakfast on the morning of the battle of Waterloo, the Emperor Napoleon declared that the Duke of Wellington was a bad general, the British were bad soldiers and that France could not fail to win an easy victory. Forever afterwards, historians have accused him of gross overconfidence and massively underestimating the caliber of the British commander opposite him. Now Andrew Roberts presents an original, highly revisionist view of the relationship between the two greatest captains of their age and of the great battle that determined European history in the nineteenth century.
Napoleon, who was born in the same year as Wellington -- 1769 -- fought Wellington by proxy years earlier in the Peninsular War, praising his ruthlessness in private while publicly deriding him as a mere "general of sepoys." In contrast, Wellington publicly lauded Napoleon, saying that his presence on a battlefield was worth forty thousand men, but privately he wrote long memoranda lambasting Napoleon's campaigning techniques.
Although Wellington saved Napoleon from execution after Waterloo, the emperor left money in his will to the man who had tried to assassinate the duke. Wellington in turn amassed a series of Napoleonic trophies of his great victory, even sleeping with two of the emperor's mistresses.
The fascinating, constantly changing relationship between these two historical giants forms the basis of Andrew Roberts's compelling study in pride, rivalry, propaganda, nostalgia and posthumous revenge. It is at once a brilliant work of military history and a triumphant biography.
Featuring a cast of fascinating supporting characters -- including the empress Josephine, the Prince Regent and Talleyrand -- Napoleon and Wellington provides the definitive account of the most decisive battle of the nineteenth century.
Customer Reviews:
Lots of dirt on two great commanders.......2006-11-22
Roberts succeeds in writing a readable and engaging comparison of the perceptions each leader possessed toward the other. The history is not a portrait of each commander separately, but rather shows the relationship between the two men in terms of conduct and word.
While the history gives more or less equal time to both commanders, what emerges, at least in my view, is a decidedly surprising and uncommonly jaundiced portrayal of Wellington. For example, Wellington pursued and seduced no less than two of Napoleon's mistresses. He filled his mansion with copious quantities of "Napoleona" -- statues, paintings, memorabilia. Indeed, for a man of Wellington's supposedly Victorian understatement, he talked of his victory over Napoleon incessantly. It is typically understood that Napoleon was an egomaniacal, self-obsessed dictator. What is less well known is that Wellington was much less the reserved, stoic gentleman his reputation would lead one to believe.
I would not consider this history to be essential reading except for buffs of the Napoleonic wars, and it gets a one-point deduction for its somewhat sordid, "tabloid-ish" quality. Still, I won't doubt the veracity of its content nor is it dry, so pick this one up if the focus is your cup of tea.
Disappointed.......2006-01-14
From the title of the book I was excited by the prospect of really coming to understand the two great minds on that historic battlefield that has rang down through history with such force. But to be blunt...I was disappointed.
Let me preface my comments by saying that I have a Napoleonic interest, but am by no means an aficionado on the subject. Therefore, I found the reading a bit too cumbersome. Perhaps it was due to my lack of depth of knowledge on the subject, but I truly feel it was due to the writing style, which never really flowed to me. If I have a more academic grasp of the subject matter or was more used to scholarly writing, I may have enjoyed it more...but I doubt it.
I never really got the sense that Roberts was telling me (the novice) a story but was rather dealing with quips and quotes and piecing them together in an attempt to form the narrative. The best thing of having read this book was that it spurred me to purchase a few other books on Napoleon himself which allowed me to develop an deep interst in the man.
Surprisingly Compelling.......2005-11-18
This book was a surprise for me. I picked it up at the library, intending to just read a couple of pages. The next thing I knew, I was 82 pages into the book. It's written well and avoids some of the dryness of other books about these 2 men. Rather than recounting the battles fought by these notorious commanders, the book focuses on the relationship between the two men that led up to the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo. It does assume that you have some historical background and that you know the basics of what happened at Waterloo and the subsequent exile of Napoleon. The angle of this book is different and refreshingly alive.
The great rivalry-Napoleon and Wellington.......2004-12-06
Although this book is subtitled "The Battle of Waterloo and the Great Commanders Who Fought It," it isn't really a straightforward military history. It is instead a rather original hybrid of biography, political and military history, and for lack of a better word, gossip. Roberts focuses on the parrallels in the careers of Napoleon and Wellington; there are remarkable similarities and differences. At the center of the narrative is the fact that Napoleon and Wellington, as the foremost military personalities of their time, were placed in a position of natural rivalry. Each was in many respects the standard against which the other was measured. Roberts, in an engaging style, brings out the perceptions (and misperceptions) each had of the other, and how these perceptions changed over time, especially after the Battle of Waterloo. For the serious reader, there are some insights into the personalities of the two leaders that help explain their respective approaches to the battlefield. For example, Roberts brings out the value for Wellington of his extensive tactical experience with infantry in India and the Peninsular War, which allowed him to personally and usefully intervene in the conduct of his battles. By contrast, Napoleon's far more rapid rise in rank left him with less experience in tactics and therefore more dependent on his marshals for the conduct of his battles. Roberts highlights that Wellington was primarily a military leader who saw himself as an agent of the British Governemnt; Napoleon's perspective was that of a head of state in pursuit of his own vision of glory, for which his leadership of the French Armies was a means to an end. Serious readers looking for battle history should seek elsewhere. For the more casual reader, there are plenty of juicy personal tidbits of the kind normally found on the personality page of the weekly Parade Magazine. These details tend to humanize two personalities long layered in myth. Roberts is to be commended for finding a original angle to ground that has been heavily worked.
A very good portrait of two great men.......2003-09-24
I enjoyed this work a great deal and found that I learned a great deal about both Wellington and Napoleon. I read it because I had read several of the Sharpe's books by Bernard Cornwell, and have become interested in the first Duke of Wellington, who is a reoccurring officer in several of the Sharpe's novels. I liked the fictional creation and wanted to see how accurate was the fictional portrait to the real man. I was gratified to learn that I liked the real life Duke as much as Cornwell's portrayal of him.
The author of this non-fiction work, Andrew Roberts, is a young historian who is excellent at researching his topic, and he is also a solid writer. While I would recommend this book to anyone, I would suggest a serious interest in the subject matter. This certainly isn't beach reading or an adventure novel, full of battle and sword.
Andrew Davis' main thrust his this: the commonly accepted historical view of these two men, Napoleon and Wellington, and the battle of Waterloo, is that Napoleon seriously underestimated Wellington's ability as a general was therefore caught by surprise by Wellington's fine generalship on the day of battle. Further, that Napoleon had no respect at all for Wellington, referring to him as "that sepoy General" (a reference to Wellington's service in India, where he won several impressive victories but had not defeated European armies). Davis does not agree with this assessment, claiming that before the battle, Napoleon had praised Wellington, and it was only after the battle, and during his long, bitter exile at St. Helena, that Napoleon became increasingly critical and insulting in his comments about Wellington. The Author spends the book reviewing the writings and actions of both men, in support of his premise.
Yet, after reading the book, I was not convinced. While the author makes it clear that as years passed Napoleon exhibited an almost demented obsession with regard to the battle of Waterloo, subsequently blaming nearly everyone present for the lose other than himself, and also in tearing down and belittling Wellington, he wasn't exactly full of praise and respect for Wellington before the battle either.
Andrew Roberts gives several examples of Napoleon's written and spoken statements about Wellington before the battle, and none of them are very substantial or enthusiastic. All of them sound like comments one general would say about another in an effort not to openly insult the other, instead of actual giving praise or respect. Take for example Davis' noting that Napoleon admitting in 1814 that Wellington had made a "reputation" for himself in the Peninsula. Could this not be seen, in the light of other comments from Napoleon regarding Wellington's opposition in the Penisula, to have been a sarcastic comment, or even an insult? The author also cites Napoleon referring to Wellington as "a man of viguor in Warfare." Not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it? Davis supplies other evidence, all of such lukewarm substance. All of Napoleon's comments on Wellington merely seem polite or measured in the same way. None of it ever smacks of real respect or supplies any indication that Napoleon was seriously impressed with Wellington. Napoleon seems to have considered Wellington a good, solid General, but certainly not in His class - perhaps the best the British had to offer.
The author bends over backward in this book to give a balanced view of both men, striving to make the point that both men were more alike that dissimilar. Again, Davis' own work does not leave me with that impression. If anything, Davis' own writings leave me with the impression that the two men were about as different as two men can be. Napoleon: a brash, classless man, so resentful and hateful of Wellington for defeating him that his soul turned small, dry and bitter, until his own obsessions and resentment ate him alive. An inspired man, and inspiring. A creature for the imagination. Wellington: a winning machine. A man possessing a razor mind and cold eyes that never, ever saw failure in anything. A creature of will and intellect, perfect for Empire. A gentleman in war and victory. In the end, Wellington was simply the better general and the better man.
Book Description
A Must for Peninsular War enthusiasts and all those interested in the famous green Riflemen Captain Leach brings his military experiences during the Napoleonic Wars into sharp relief. We share the rigours of campaigning and dangers of the battlefield, but his descriptions of the events in the broader military scene and his description of the country through which he journeys assist in bringing the era to life for everyone interested in the adventures of this famous regiment and its men.
Average customer rating:
- Interesting, but Limited
- 'For lack of a nail..."
|
Hougoumont: The Key to Victory at Waterloo
Julian Paget , and
Derek Saunders
Manufacturer: Combined Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Belgium
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
19th Century
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Germany
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ireland
| 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
ASIN: 0850523419 |
Customer Reviews:
Interesting, but Limited.......2001-10-04
Although the fighting around Hougoumont Chateau on 18 June 1815 had a major impact upon the on-going Battle of Waterloo, it usually receives only cursory attention in most accounts of that famous battle. In this Battleground Europe volume, the fighting around Hougoumont finally gets adequate coverage and Napoleonic enthusiasts should appreciate the uniqueness of this book. Unfortunately, while the book does provide an spotlight on an interesting aspect of the Battle of Waterloo, the inherent limitations of this volume detract from its historical value.
The book itself consists of thirteen shorts chapters, with the first providing a detail history and layout of Hougoumont Chateau. Another chapter is used to provide background on the campaign. Ten chapters cover the British occupation and defense of Hougoumont, including one chapter that covers the immediate aftermath of battle. A final chapter consists of a tour of Hougoumont today. Three appendices are included: a detailed hourly chronology, British personalities at Hougoumont and orders of battle on Allied and French troops at Hougoumont. However selected bibliography displays the limited sources used, including the unreliable Siborne and regimental histories. One of the authors, Julian Paget, is a retired officer from the Coldstream Guards and he has used regimental records to enhance this account, at least from the British side. Unfortunately, the French side is greatly neglected, with little information provided on units and almost none on commanders. Napoleon's brother Jerôme who pushed the attack, and his division commanders, remain ciphers in this account. Apparently, no French sources were consulted.
The wider issue of the impact of the struggle for Hougoumont on the outcome at Waterloo is addressed obliquely and with some exaggeration. Napoleon conceived of the attack on Hougoumont as a diversion that he hoped would divert at least British attention, if not reserves, away from his main effort in the center. This concept was tactically sound, and was originally only supposed to employ one division of the three in the French II Corps. It was a combination of Jerôme's escalation of his minor role in the battle into a full-fledged but uncoordinated corps attack and Napoleon's inability to reign him in, that really hurt the French cause. The author's cite Napoleon's failure to initially use his massed artillery against Hougoumont as a "mistake" but they fail to realize that (A) Napoleon would not waste his massed artillery reserve against a fortified target that was not his main effort and which initially only held a few hundred skirmishers, (B) Jerôme had plenty of II Corps and divisional artillery available to support his own attacks and (C) the muddy, wooded and cultivated terrain around Hougoumont inhibited rapid deployment of French artillery in a close support role against the chateau. Actually, Wellington made a significant mistake by not deploying at least one battery within the grounds of Hougoumont since grapeshot would have inflicted huge losses on the French infantry as they crossed the open ground to the south. British artillery supporting Hougoumont was deployed too far to the rear to employ anything but solid shot or howitzer shells. Whether or not French 12 pounder solid shot could have breached the walls of Hougoumont is also open to debate.
This book is an interesting read because it offers new perspectives on a well-known battle. Unfortunately, the author's predilection is to provide an glory-tinged narrative of one of his regiment's most famous actions - and at that limited objective he succeeds. Yet the wider goal of providing a fresh and balanced account of this crucial side-show remains unfulfilled.
'For lack of a nail...".......2001-07-21
Suppose LtCol.MacDonnel and a handful of Coldstream Guards hadn't forced the north gates shut; Hougoumont may have been taken. Without Hougoumont, Wellington's right flank was vulnerable. With Wellington's right crumbling, Napoleon wins Waterloo before Blucher and his Prussians can arrive. The Austrians, Russians, and Prussians negotiate a separate peace, Napoleon is ascendant in Europe, Germany doesn't become a world power, no Versailles Treaty, no Hitler, no World War Two, etc...
Or perhaps not.
But it wouldn't be exagerating to say that Hougoumont was the pivot upon which the Battle of Waterloo hinged. Julian Paget, himself a member of the Coldstream Guards, presents a detailed account of this critical episode that is usually discussed all to briefly in the more general histories of Waterloo. This book is filled with photographs, maps, a minute by minute timeline, and a breakdown of each section of the battle: the forcing of the gates, the orchard, the formal garden, etc. Paget even dispels the myth, promulgated by Victor Hugo in Les Miserables, about the 300 French bodies being dumped down the well.
The final section of this compact book is a guide for tourists, with an interest in history, for it leads you step by step through present day Hougoumont. Appendix includes the complete Order of Battle and bibliography. Overall, even though not monumental in scope, this book gets five stars for accomplishing its goal of covering one of the most decisive moments in the Napoleonic Wars.
Book Description
The three commanders-in-chief during the Waterloo campaign rank among the most famous soldiers in history. Rarely have three such remarkable men as Napoleon, Wellington and Blucher confronted each other on a field of battle or had such an impact on the history of their time. Andrew Uffindell, in this readable and meticulously researched three-part biography, gives vivid accounts of their parallel lives and extraordinary careers. The dramatic contrasts that emerge between their backgrounds, personalities and methods of command offer a fascinating insight into the secrets of leadership and into the warfare of the Napoleonic era.
Customer Reviews:
Compare and Contrast..........2007-08-17
Andrew Uffindell's "Waterloo Commanders" is a new entry into a crowded field of books about the Battle of Waterloo. His approach is to compare and contrast the three principal commanders at Waterloo: Napoleon of France, Wellington of Great Britain, and Blutcher of Prussia. Their clash of arms over 15-18 June 1815 remains one of the most dramatic military events in modern Western History.
The basic facts of the professional lives of Napoleon and Wellington are well known; Uffindel moves briskly through their narratives. Blutcher has gotten rather less attention than his British ally or his French opponent; his long and varied career in uniform will be of interest to many readers. Uffindell's account of the Battle of Waterloo itself is concise and reasonably even-handed with respect to each leader. He touches briefly on the lives of the three men after Waterloo: Napoleon to bitter exile on St. Helena, Wellington to a long career in British politics, and Blutcher to an all too-brief retirement.
The real payoff of the book may be Uffindell's concluding effort to assess the respective personalities, styles of leadership, methods of comand and control, and expertise at strategy and tactics of the three men. His discussion is closely-reasoned, nuanced, and concise; the reader need not agree with Uffindell's conclusions to appreciate the analysis.
Uffindell is no slave to anyone's legend. Battlefield failures share space with successes. He notes how just how close to defeat Napoleon was in famous victories such as the Battle of Marengo. His harsh assessement that Wellington was not an innovator in infantry tactics is probably technically accurate, if less relevant than his consistent success in execution. Blutcher's history of alcoholism and mental disorder make his successful leadership all the more remarkable.
"Waterloo Commanders" is well recommended to the general reader seeking an above average survey-level history. The experienced student of the Napoleonic Wars may find less in this book that constitutes new or different material. The book includes a collection of easy-to-understand maps and a small but well-chosen selection of illustrations.
Average customer rating:
- Excellent account of the strategic and political aspects of Britain's struggle with France.
- Everyone knows that God is an Englishman!
- Interesting and Enjoyable Historical Account
- Excellent insights into the decisions that led to victory!
|
Britain and the Defeat of Napoleon, 1807-1815
Rory Muir
Manufacturer: Yale University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Belgium
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Portugal
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Spain
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| France
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
19th Century
| England
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ireland
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Western
| Europe
| 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
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0300064438 |
Book Description
Placing Britain`s defeat of Napoleonic France in a wholly modern perspective, this book presents a new assessment of the last years of the long war and reveals that the British economy and political system were as essential to victory as military might and tactical brilliance. Rory Muir`s comprehensive account of the era shows how politicians, the press, the crown, civilians, soldiers, and commanders together achieved the victory.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent account of the strategic and political aspects of Britain's struggle with France........2006-02-04
This is a very interesting and well written account of the later years of the war against France. As is clear from other reviews and the book description, this is an account of the political and financial aspects as much as the military. I'd just like to add that the narratvie becomes more European after 1812 as Russia, Prussia and then Austria rejoin the war. A lot of space then becomes devoted to the negotiations between the Powers. The book also contains an account of the war with the US from 1812-1814.
As for 'A reader' who complains that Rory Muir is writing about "how great was his country" along with "a legion of fellow English writers", he's not English, he's Australian, which 'A reader' should have known if he or she had read the book. And any Australian will tell you that there's a big difference between being an Australian and being English.
And I don't know which book Elisabeth Altieri was reading either because Muir's Bibliographical Essay at the back of the book is very helpful in pointing the reader to books by other writers, both contemporary ones and older ones. He obviously has a very high opinion of most of them, enthuses about many and savages none. This is a very useful essay and is six pages of very small print.
Everyone knows that God is an Englishman!.......2000-03-30
Stand back, everyone...stand back and be enlightened on how great a country we English have and how we beat the "anti-Christ," Napoleon! Rory Muir's portrait of the war and how great was his country, amounts to nothing more than marching in lock-step with a legion of fellow English writers who are hell-bent on a never-ending agenda of attempting to portray their long-disappeared Empire as the "saviour" of Western Europe. The whole exercise smacked of something that was originally intended to be published in a magazine that caters to the selected audience to which the message is crafted.
Interesting and Enjoyable Historical Account.......1999-08-04
I found this book surprisingly very easy to read and it held my interest throughout. It covered most facets of Britain's role in the war against Napoleon. As the previous review mentions it looks at why the British Government carried out certain policies and the affects of those policies on it's field army under Wellington, its continental allies and the rest of the countries and people involved in the Napoleonic Wars.
This was a very interesting and enjoyable account of the war against Napoleon and I did not find it dull at any time. Although it only scratched the surface of the military campaigns it gave enough detail for the reader to understand completely what was happening and why.
Overall this is a well written and researched account of Britain's role in Napoleon's downfall and should appeal to anyone interested in this period of history.
Excellent insights into the decisions that led to victory!.......1996-12-17
Anyone interested in the Napoleonic wars will find this
account of the political, financial and economic factors
behind the British stubborn resistance to Napoleon
enlightening. Common, everyday, history books tell you what
happened and what people did. Muir tells why it happened
with explanations of why the various political leaders,
generals, etc adopted the policies they did. Among other
insights, one has a considerably better understanding of
political environment for Wellington's Spanish campaign and
of the enormous financial problems his campaign created for
England.
Books:
- West to a Land of Plenty: The Diary of Teresa Angelino Viscardi, New York to Idaho Territory, 1883 (Dear America)
- What They Fought For 1861-1865
- 1776
- A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier
- Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army
- Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons
- Chief of Station, Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone
- Chief of Station, Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone
- Cold War Submarines: The Design and Construction of U.S. and Soviet Submarines, 1945-2001
- Corps Commanders of the Bulge: Six American Generals and Victory in the Ardennes (Modern War Studies)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Taino Indian Myth and Practice: The Arrival of the Stranger King
- History: Fiction or Science
- A New General Catalogue of the Ants of the World
- Chemistry of the Elements, Second Edition
- Eat Right 4 Your Type: The Individualized Diet Solution to Staying Healthy, Living Longer & Achi
- J.K. Lasser's Your Winning Retirement Plan
- Good Morning, Midnight
- A Basic Guide to Fair Housing Accessibility : Everything Architects and Builders Need to Know About
- Building Security: Handbook for Architectural Planning and Design
- Orchids of the Western Great Lakes Region
The Sharpe Companion: The Early Years
The Man Who Broke Napoleon's Codes
Sharpe's Fury: Richard Sharpe & the Battle of Barrosa, March 1811 (Richard Sharpe's Adventure Series #11)
The Spanish Ulcer: A History of the Peninsular War
Wellington: The Iron Duke
