🚩 Go to bit.ly/thld_cs_historymarche and use code HISTORYMARCHE to save 25% off today. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video. 🚩 If you'd like to support what we do, you can do so on Patreon: www.patreon.com/historymarche - By joining us on Patreon you get to see our videos before everyone else, ads free, and periodically you can vote to choose topics for our channel.
History class: “Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo, now let’s move on to WWI.” HistoryMarche: “There was a staircase next to Napoleons possible office in 1815.”
Your history class mentioned Napoleon? Lucky! In my experience, every year in America history is the same. Revolutionary War, glossing over the constitution with an emphasis on the least relevant amendments, black history month, skim WWII but emphasize the ethics of Hiroshima/ Nagasaki, Vietnam/ America Sucks, years almost over just watch the news.
The Russian campaign also led to his defeat at Leipzig due to the amount of calvary he lost. His reconnaissance on the enemy was severely lacking due a distinct shortage of horses.
Not just that, Napoleon lost his spark as a general, he wasnt the same general that everyone knew him. He was too focused on the government in Paris, and not focused at all in this battle, to the point that even among his generals arguing about him and his decisions one said out of anger "Napoleon is not the same man we knew"
This is one of the most articulate videos on the Waterloo Campaign I 've ever watched...It is indeed rare to find videos which focus on the most decisive factor that shapes history...the damn detail! Well done! Truly well done!
In all the reading I've done on this campaign, authors are content only to describe Soult's "bungling" of the concentration orders. Your timeline and the associated maps are a stunning revelation on what might have happened. Thanks so much!
In the 19th century, most who studied the campaign knew that something was off. Lettow-Vorbeck recognized the major flaw of June 12 and the subsequent delay to the campaign, but his work was largely ignored. Unfortunately, Stoffel died before publishing his history, and the draft was sold. (I have purchased this and it will be published in the next few years.) Soult so clearly failed, but the details were missing. Discovering two of his registries and Bertrand's registry from 1815 (along with d'Erlon's and a lot of other docs) provided the correspondence necessary to see the train-wreck in slow motion. Soult failed. But also Gerard failed. Ney/Reille/d'Erlon get too much blame for June 16 from those that analyze perfect intelligence rather than the actual communications and knowledge the French acted on.
@@carrott36 Not really, Napoleon was doomed the moment that Grouchy failed to stop the Prussians at Wavre. Even if Napoleon had managed to beat Wellington before the Prussians arrived on the battlefield at 13:00, he still would not have had won a big victory but rather another costly tactical victory without strategic importance. Wellington would probably have retreated with the remains of his army to those 17,000 men he had left at Hall. So crushing the British army would not have been the end of the campaign, much less the end of the war itself. The Prussians would have been contend to either give battle or retreat and wait for the Russians and Austrians to cross into France, much like they did in 1814.
Many of us underestimate the importance of spies in war. Great generals are remembered but not great spies. Excellent video, this truly demonstrates the importance of intelligence in warfare. Could you please make some videos on famous spies in WW2? It would be pretty interesting. Marvelous video and hope to see more in the future. And what about Ain Jalut or my boy, Hannibal?
Thank you sir. WW2 topics will surely be done, there's just always a ton of projects floating around and I'm mostly a one-man team when it comes to production, animation, graphics, so it's a process :)
There were three major mistakes at Waterloo: 1) wasting good troops trying to take Hougoumont due to a miscommunication, 2) Marshal Ney wasting some of the best cavalry going against armed squares without first using cannon to break up the squares, and 3) Grouchy and his 30,000 troops not coming to support Napoleon when they heard the cannon, despite the pleas of his second-in-command. There was also some bad luck, with torrential rains softening the ground delaying the French deployment of the cannon and cavalry, and Napoleon being ill on the day of the battle.
Ney has more guilt than he deserved Napolein itself decided to send the guard cavalry to support the attack to then refuse to sent infantry that requested
My understanding of this battle was that the Prussians arrived at the last minute, just as the old guard broke. I didn’t know the British and Prussian generals were so close that they were able to meet in person. Good video.
Prussians played a huge part in the outcome. They were the ones who were able to get information from French traitors about Napoleon's concentration 12h ahead of time, and they then hastily deployed to offset a disaster. But the main issue for Napoleon was the delay caused by the confusion of the two orders (Mons order and Charleroi order), he literally lost almost 2 days, which is huge. Had that confusion not occurred, the Prussians would not have been tipped off in time, and Napoleon would've been able to surprise and overwhelm the Prussian I Corps and move in between Wellington and Blucher, thus defeating the allies and forcing them to retreat. Instead, the Prussians managed to inform Wellington and the Allies managed to semi-organize for Napoleon's attack, ultimately defeating him at Waterloo. I highly recommend you check out the books from Stephen Beckett about this topic. The volumes contain a wealth of information that isn't available anywhere in the world currently. There are pictures and analysis of documents that, until now, have been in private collections, so all of the information from those documents was not previously available and this information is critical for understanding the events that unfolded in the days prior to Waterloo. Here's a link to his books www.mapleflowerhouse.com
Not to mention all other "divine interventions" like that rain happened the night before the battle, the sudden absence of Napoleon during the battle because of his illness. You don't see things like these happened in Austerlitz . It appears that Fortuna herself didn't want Napoleon to win.
Napoleon was never sick, people point to his conditions and say he was ill but it seems this was not the case upon further examination. I’d recommend the book ‘Waterloo’ by Andrew W. Field.
A very interesting perspective. Without the spies and confusion, Napoleon would have gained an easier march on Brussels. But with them he fought two major engagements...Ligny and Waterloo. At Waterloo, the French were tactically incompetent. Cavalry against formed squares, not disabling the Allied cannon, not burning Hougoumont, not beginning battle earlier or even scouting out the direction of Blucher's withdrawl from Ligny. They even messed up D'Erlon's march onto the Prussian rear...which would have achieved a decisive victory at Ligny. However, would this have been a pin prick on an elephant if Napoleon had won? He still had to face Russian and Austrian armies? I feel his only victory would have been to prolong the war.
Congratulations, you have moved the notch of quality and attention to detail to almost academic level. I have never watched this detailed account of any historic battle. Please keep this way.
Thank you sir. Actually, Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public. But thanks to Stephen, who persuaded many of these rich private collectors to share the documents, we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information. Thank you very much for watching.
HistoryMarche thank you for your reply. I have always been obsessed with Napoleon’s victories and era in general and read different books. I will most definitely buy the books by Mr Stephen. Thank you both, give us more of Napoleon)))
This isn't so much a video about the battle of Waterloo itself, but a video about the *days leading up to the battle of Waterloo*, and how military and intelligence operations impacted the outcome of the battle itself.
@@HistoryMarche And it was very informative and a fresh perspective that we often don't see in those types of clips so I thank you and your team for it.... Still it is fun to troll K&G
@@morningmidnight9398 Indeed, most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has manage to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections. These documents contain orders, correspondence, reports, intelligence gathering, reports about spies, etc, thus providing new, never-before-seen, evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video).
As I understand it, Marshal Berthier was the aide who composed most of Napoleon's orders into written form. Napoleon was (or so I understand) very confusing when giving verbal orders and Berthier had a knack for piecing together what Napoleon really meant. When Napoleon returned from exile, Berthier didn't rejoin him, and the confusion in orders could be due to having someone translating the verbal orders into written form who wasn't experienced or completely understanding of how to do that translating.
At Waterloo, the French were betrayed when a cuirassier deserted to the Allies and warned them of the impending attack of Napoleon's Imperial Guard, half an hour in advance. Wellington was able to shorten his lines in response.
That's very interesting. While this very well done episode of HistoryMarche certainly explains how N.'s initial plan failed; the battle at Waterloo itself was not a foregone conclusion. There must be more to it.
The final attack of the imperial guard was mounted by the middle guard, and followed by the old guard. The attack swept away a lot of wellingtons forces, routing British foot guards, Dutch artillery, highlands regiments and various other units. It was finally beaten back by a bayonet charge by British infantry and fled, the old guard stood their ground however and did not break. Winners propaganda portrays the attack as the old guard getting routed by hidden redcoats. Far from reality
Wow, as a die hard enthusiast of the Napoleonic Era I didn't know many of these details! Extremely interesting! Thanks for the great stuff, interested in seeing more of your content. Happy 205th anniversary of Waterloo too!
Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
Forgotten fact is Wellington said later that if he had his army of the Peninsula campaign at Waterloo he would have gone on the attack instead of the defensive/holding battle he fought.
@@theodoresmith5272 Your correct the bulk were in America as for New Orleans that defeat was down to the incompetence of a senior, (non Peninsula), officer who neglected orders to equip his men with scaling ladders, a similar action on a different part of the battlefield where ladders were issued resulted in the British taking the position. Irony was the war was over before this battle even started.
@Евгений Иванов I suggest you read up on Wellingtons objectives for the battle:) His army was a mix of different nationalities, (only 24,000 were British), hastily assembled and outnumbered and his aim from the start was to hold the ground until the Prussians arrived which thanks to his pre planning & actions he did. As for the British they defeated the French firstly in Portugal and then on into Spain and at Waterloo when the Middle Guard advanced on the British, (Wellington grouped all the British to face them), they defeated them as well. Simple fact is the Guards could have done what they've done before and snatched victory from defeat but at Waterloo the British Guards, (unlike the Russians, Prussians & Austrians in other battles), stood their ground and poured disciplined volleys of fire into their ranks, all they had to do was break the British line, they couldn't. Napoleon didn't expect this as he'd never faced Redcoats before, (although he had been defeated at Acre by Sir Sidney Smith of the RN), his Generals and dare I say soldiers many of who were veterans of Spain had faced the British before and new of their fighting prowess.
@@tonyjames5444 I'm well versed in the battle details. You forgot to mention that the British artillery lost against the American artillery the day before. Also rhe americans killed most of the officers. It wasn't it not just the one officer who forgot the ladders but all of them that didn't figure it out before the battle started. 3 generals and 7 colonels killed along with 2000 troops seems like more went wrong then forgetting ladders. All that damage was inflicted buy a band off non soldiers. The British always have an excuse for major loses. Vs the Zulu it was the ammo boxes didnt open. Wellington has his own disaster rarely mentioned but his retreat from burgos was a disaster.
@@theodoresmith5272 Actually the artillery duel as you call it ended because the British ran out of ammunition and American records show defenders on the left of their line had broken and ran. As for the ladders it is accepted by all that Colonel Mullins was to blame and as for the British casualties Mullins errors and the determination of the British to press on with the attack, (admired by the defenders), made these inevitable. As previously stated Thornton's 85th Brigade who were a separate force did overwhelm and take the line on the western side of the river and its accepted by many that with better organisation and coordination the British would have won the battle. As for your childish rant about Wellington every military commander has set backs, I could mention the US failings in Canada or some of Washingtons from the Revolutionary war. (ps I served 27 years in the Royal Marines and did a number of exchanges in the US and my statements on New Orleans were backed up by what I was told by American guides during a battlefield tour in 1998:) End of chat.
I just found out that this video is based on the book WATERLOO BETRAYED by Stephen Beckett. Very entertaining and enlightening but needs to be read critically according to one book reviewer.
Indeed it is. In fact Stephen Beckett and I collaborated on this video. Stephen wrote the script for the video and was participating in the production as well. And, speaking of his books, they're nothing short of spectacular - 15+ years worth of research.
This is incorrect. Waterloo Betrayed was released in 2015, and revealed some of these details. The basis of this video was the 2018 publication based on the discovery of hundreds of new pieces of French correspondence, most from private collections. That work has been met with universal acclaim as it has rewritten the campaign. It proved some of Waterloo Betrayed, but disproved other elements.
I'm French but in response to this very honest report, I would say that the British infantry also did show this day an incredible courage and resistance in defense. All the old soldiers know that the defense is not always easier than the offense. In offense you marche because everybody march, no choice! In defense you see masses coming at you .. and to stand and stay need a huge control on yourself! Much respect for the "habits rouges"!
@@myasuujo3330 Britain was the only country to faiths against Napoleon near constantly, even when he had all of Europe under his thumb Britain still fought on, and let’s not forget the reason why so many coalitions were formed against France is because France had a massive population
@@myasuujo3330 Britain was the only country to faiths against Napoleon near constantly, even when he had all of Europe under his thumb Britain still fought on, and let’s not forget the reason why so many coalitions were formed against France is because France had a massive population
The battle of Waterloo was not fought in Waterloo. Wellington was staying in a hotel in Waterloo and wrote his victory letter from there, and thus, the battle was known as the battle of Waterloo. The actual battle was fought down the road from Waterloo. Wellington and the Allies were on the ridge at Mount St. Jean. Farmlands stretched southward toward the village of Plancenoit. Napoleon sat upon a horse on a small ridge that led into the village. The battle was fought on farmland which was freshly plowed and and very wet. It rains in Belgium almost every night. Thus, the greatest artillery in the world, Napoleon's, was hard pressed to be effective. The cannon balls would embed in the muck as opposed to skimming along the ground and ploughing into the ranks of the Brits and allies. There is a farmhouse on the road in the midst of the battle. 1000 allies took position behind the walls and in the house creating a crossfire on the French as they charged up the hill. I live in Plancenoit for 4 years and drove across the battlefield everyday on the way to work. The Butte de Leon sits on the ridge with the Lion facing France almost as dare for the French to not return.
If you anderstand french, there are good videos on this topic from the youtube channel "surlechamp". The italian campagne is very interesting because it is the place where Napoléon had tried new things.
Anglo-Dutch is also kinda misleading, as „Germans“ (of course back then there was no united Germany) outnumbered the Dutch and made up the largest troop contingent of the allied army under Wellington.
The true hero of Waterloo: David Hendrik Chassé In 1815 he distinguished himself as commander of the 3rd Division at the Battle of Waterloo. During this battle, the division was initially positioned entirely on the right flank, around the village of Braine-l'Alleud. Soon the order came to position themselves in reserve behind the center of the Allied line. Chassé noticed that the British troops ahead of him were fleeing and the artillery was no longer firing. He soon saw that Napoleon was sending the Imperial Guard towards the center; He then ordered his artillery to take position and fire on the enemy, while in the meantime he had Colonel Detmers' brigade lined up in columns for the counterattack. After a short firefight he opened the attack on the French guard, who eventually had to give way. Detmers' brigade continued the attack, driving the French Guard from a last position at La Haye Sainte and pursuing the fleeing French as far as the Maison du Roi at Plancenoit, where they encountered Prussian troops. To the horror of Chassé and his officers, the Duke of Wellington made no mention of the attack by Chassé's division in his report. Despite assurances from British general Lord Hill, who recognized the Dutch role in the battle of Waterloo, this omission was never corrected. King William I appointed Chassé Commander of the Military William Order on July 8, 1815 because of his services in Waterloo.[3] He was praised by Napoleon after the Battle of Waterloo.
No just a general doing his duty. Don't make out his effort to help repel the Guard right at the end was the sole reason Waterloo was won . He was the enemy in Spain only a few years before
You can assume the land as did Wellington. As he said, he had this particular position in his mind for a very long time. But Napoleon still pressed him to the very edge of Defeat. He prayed and received Blucher. A very lucky catch. All the spies in the world cannot defeat a great army on the field of battle. Napoleon came within a hair's breath of achieving victory at Waterloo. Blucher, in his sustained hatred of Napoleon, marched relentlessly to the aid of Wellington and Grouchy simply was not up to the challenge of blocking the Prussian's march.
This piece of land, I might have guessed may be the field at Waterloo. According to 1970 film about the battle. Wellington said to his officers over a table at Brussels "I have observed this field there at Waterloo" meaning he had seen the field a few months ago and guessed it is perfect for a battle.
@@americanworkingsteel8062 However, it should be remembered that Waterloo was Wellington's victory. It was his plan that the Anglo-Dutch and Prussian armies combine forces and defeat Napoleon. This was what eventually happened, but much later in the day than Wellington would have liked. So the praying for Blucher was more to do with Blucher's arrival time, rather than hoping Blucher would even show up. Bluchers delay was caused by issues with the Prussians marching through the rearguard at Wavre, then untangling their corps and marching across from Wavre to La Belle Alliance on secondary roads. Initially Wellington expected the Prussians to make an appearance around 11:00am, but they didn't start making their presence felt for another 5 hours. This meant that Wellington spent the first half of the battle fending off French assaults with what amounted to a 2nd rate army (many British units contained many unblooded troops, the Dutch units were considered of dubious loyalty). The arrival of Zieten's corps on the left flank of the Anglo-Dutch army allowed Wellington to shift units from there to the centre of the field in time to meet the attack of the Imperial Guard, while the other two corps under Blucher sapped the strength of the final attack by siphoning off the Young Guard and other units. Although Grouchy is blamed for not showing up, it's not like he didn't try. Part of the problem is that Grouchy swung his corps too far east, so when he finally figured out where Blucher was, he was on the wrong side of the Prussian army facing a rearguard covering river crossings. Also, for all that history blames him, Grouchy actually received orders from Napoleon at 2:00pm that were dictated at around 11:00am by the Emperor telling him to continue chasing the Prussians. So Napoleon did himself in the neck not only by underestimating Wellington's abilities, but also by reinforcing an order the kept his last possible reserve of troops off on a wild goose chase. As far as Napoleon winning, that is up to debate. I rather like what one historian said, which was that Napoleon might have won at Waterloo, but it would have been a pyrrhic victory that would have left his army in ruins. Plus, given the Duke of Wellington's experience in offense and defense, it is likely that the Anglo-Dutch army would have survived to fight another day, while Napoleon was starting to scrape the bottom of the manpower barrel.
Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
How intriguing would it be had Napoleon not been betrayed from within nor had Soult been in the correct place to receive the orders and there was no delay to Napoleon's plans. Things could have been very different. Amazing video and I learned so much about Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. He really was a genius tactician and France's greatest emperor.
Johnny Nguyen Given that several hundred thousand soldiers of Austria, Russia, various German countries etc. were on the march towards France it didn’t really matter what happens at Waterloo Napoleon was going to lose the war anyway.
@@HingerlAlois Not necessarily. Napoleon won all the previous coalition wars against him against superior numbers. The french army at the time was arguably better in training and tactics than the allies, even than Prussia.
Johnny Nguyen Not really, he had a lot of allies (Germans, Poles, Italians,...) who increased the numbers of his army and helped him win his wars. In 1815 he had no allies and pretty much entire Europe against him at the same time, the allies had almost one million soldiers available for their attack on France, at Waterloo he fought against one tenth of the allied forces.
HingerlAlois he had those allies after 1807 and even then they mainly helped in the invasion of Russia French victories like Marengo and Austerlitz, Jena-Ouerstadt were primarily French victories Though their allies did no doubt help
Fraser Whyte He had allies already before 1807. For example in the Second Napoleonic War in 1805 he had basically southern Germany (Bavaria, Württemberg,...) as well as some other states (Spain, Italy, parts of the Netherlands) as allies that increased his available troop numbers. In 1815 he had pretty much entire Europe against him and no allies at all. He had never faced a situation as bad as the one in 1815.
Thank you very much. Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public. But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information. Thank you very much for watching.
@@HistoryMarche Thank you for the reply, Waterloo is such an battle and campaign to study, and Mr. Beckett's new book will definitely be something I will have to read!
Well done. I am always surprised, that I learn new things about well known topics when watching your videos. Thank you so much for providing intelligent and informative entertainment for us. Keep up the great work ❤️👍🏻
Fun fact is that Jerome (Napoleon brother) heard about the prussians plan to help Wellington, but Napoleon, after the victory of Ligny, thought that the Prussians would not fight again.
This era is the most fascinating history of Europe in my opinion, all of Europe declared war not to France but Napoleon himself! He really deserves his own era. And as usual, another magnificent video historymarche!
Totally agree. Most fascinating period of history. French Revolution + Napoleon period. Then the reactionary forces tried to erase the heritage of this period but their efforts were doomed.
As a historian I can say your content is as true to history as it can be. Your research and presentation of said research is impeccable. I would love to see you do an episode on Jumonville Glen.
I enjoy the way you break the battels down and go step by step. With that break down, I am actually able to understand what happened with a deep understand rather than just saying they won or lost and your Michael the brave 5 part series was really amazing I have never heard of him, and his exploits through the three kingdoms and the short series was excellent.
Also he includes the movement of the armies before the battle and the fight for positions which are often far more important than sometimes simplistic battle tactics especially in ancient or medieval battles . The videos he did on the Caesar campaigns are a great example of that. It gives you an actual understanding of the decisive advantages which were gained . I often thought about that while playing Total war games, issuing countless mini tactical orders to specific troops. Actual battles were not like that because this level of control is impossible for a real general , so what made great generals great ? The things which happened before the actual battle tactics, at least in ancient or medieval armies .
Thank you very much for watching. Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
@@HistoryMarche Thank you. There are valleys in Iowa settled by veterans of Napoleon's armies, little out of the way spots that my father took us to in the 1960's on various family outings. He knew of these places through his work as a surveyor/civil engineer for the Milwaukee Railroad. Somehow seeing to where those men came to to start life anew made that history real.
I was pretty ecstatic when I saw a video from you guys about Waterloo. Intruiging stuff, Id never heard of this theory and it is really fascinating. Thanks for another masterful video guys!
Thank you very much. Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public. But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information.
@@Ragnarok__ He didn't betray Spain.He just placed on the Spanish throne his brother Joseph Bonaparte and he sent french forces to Spain (in1808) to just re-organise the country.If you read and study about the Peninsular war you will find out that Joseph Bonaparte had many supporters from the big towns of Spain.The rebellions had started to the villages and small towns from UNEDUCATED people.They were fighting for a king that lived and ate to Paris like an Emperor(I am talking about Ferdinand VII).As for the Republic you can just say that he never betrayed the ideas of the French Revolution and that he expanded them to all Europe which means that he helped the Republic.I don't know what exactly you mean saying that he betrayed the Monarchy.Just think about it when he became the first Consul he invited many nobles to come back to France and he helped church.
@@josephchristopherdeboulogn2365 uneducated or no, there were many good reasons for the Spanish to fight against the French dictatorship that controlled Spain during napoleons reign.
Great video thanks! A battle I've always been interested in, collecting books and maps and have painted hundreds of miniature soldiers of the battle including Napoleon and the French, British and Prussians. 🎖🎖👍
Very brilliant video. I noticed something about Napoleon which I'm sure everybody else has noticed also. It seems Napoleon holds a certain spell over people, people who hate him and people who love him, myself included. Just scroll down the comment section on this video and you will see what I mean then compare it to say Hannibal videos you guys have made, people are very rarely neutral about Napoleon, there is something so fascinating about him.
@@Thin_Mercury I never said Napoleon was literally like Hitler. And why is it ignorant to draw similarities between them? Both held a certain spell over people, both have people that love and hate them and both individuals divide people till this day. What am I missing?
@@pgrothschild Many more people respect and love Napoleon nowadays then Hitler. Napoleon is actually a great hero in many countries like Poland, Greece, Germany and the Balkans. It is only Britain who teaches savagely anti Napoleon stuff in schools though I'm sure he has many fans there also. Hitler however is literally despised by every country in the world, even Germany and Winston Churchill always said Napoleon was a man of many virtues, though like all of us he was not perfect.
Epic history is already covering Napoleons campaigns and already covered waterloo BUT this is a very different and interesting look at it. *sorry to clarify I watch a bunch of history on youtube, i'm just worried many channels are going to cover the exact same thing, but if they have different takes on the same events that's cool.
@@hocestbellumchannel Yes, sorry to clarify I watch a bunch of history on youtube, i'm just worried many channels are going to cover the exact same thing, but if they have different takes on the same events that's cool.
Some people ask : what if Napoleon would have won at Waterloo ? He might have but his enemies had much more resources than him , another battle would have follow , and another one and the great corsicane , eventually ,would have lost .A single person can't rule Europe , not forever ,and you won battles building bridges not walls .
Thank you sir. Actually, much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. His books contain contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public. But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ As for Mihai, There's a lot of research material for Michael the Brave p3, more than the first two parts combined. So it'll take some time to complete.
@@HistoryMarche I may have to do just that, it's very interesting! I appreciate your response and hard work. You've quickly become one of the best channels. I look forward to the next one!
Is it possible that Grouchy also betrayed him? After all, he was supposed to keep the Prussians in check. Beautifully made clip. Imagination is such a superior form of learning. And that's what you guys do, you bring imagination to life. After all, "a picture is worth a thousand words."
Grouchy was engaged with a Prussian Army at the battle of Wavre. He thus was unable to come to Waterloo. He won that battle on the same day as Napoleon lost Waterloo. Grouchy did his job well, but Napoleon failed.
@@DaS-rh2ji you wrote Groucy betrayed Napoleon by not coming to Waterloo, and when I point out he was engaged in a battle the very same day, you wrote that was your point. No, your point was that Groucy betrayed Napoleon, which is clearly not the case.
@@schusterlehrling Grouchy was chasing Blucher, which means he was on Blucher's tail. If he were truly engaged, then Blucher wouldn't have been able to reach Waterloo. Yet Blucher pours into napoleon's right flank. Again I only raised its possibility.
He should have played defensive not offensive this time. Is very strange that a master of the wars made those mistakes. Like he said " If you fight long enough with your enemies they would learn your art of war". They learned it. He said also " you should change your tactics every 10 years" He forgot his quotes. Respect to Napoleon. He was part of those rare people that try to reach the stars and fail because of their over extended ambitions. A great man.
Playing defensive would have done nothing but assured his defeat, he needed to try and knock out some of the enemy forces to even the odds and buy him time for new troops to be mobilized
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
🚩 Go to bit.ly/thld_cs_historymarche and use code HISTORYMARCHE to save 25% off today. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video.
🚩 If you'd like to support what we do, you can do so on Patreon: www.patreon.com/historymarche - By joining us on Patreon you get to see our videos before everyone else, ads free, and periodically you can vote to choose topics for our channel.
Waterloo was not lost, France was lost.
@Shivaji the Great I can relate
@Shivaji the Great To the game. I lost Waterloo IRL cause I was so focused on playing Total War.
@Shivaji the Great 😲😲😲😲
@Shivaji the Great Yes I have. As France. I won too.
History class: “Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo, now let’s move on to WWI.” HistoryMarche: “There was a staircase next to Napoleons possible office in 1815.”
Hehe
i hate how they depicted him in my history textbook despite being indian. I thought we kicked the british out but never mind
@@Commielover69 Didn't you?
Your history class mentioned Napoleon? Lucky! In my experience, every year in America history is the same. Revolutionary War, glossing over the constitution with an emphasis on the least relevant amendments, black history month, skim WWII but emphasize the ethics of Hiroshima/ Nagasaki, Vietnam/ America Sucks, years almost over just watch the news.
@Dylan stodgy?
Napoleons shortage of horses was mainly due to his disastrous Russia campaign of 1812. He also lost a lot of his best seasoned troops.
not a history expert..but it seemed he was destined fro defeat before he even started
The Russian campaign also led to his defeat at Leipzig due to the amount of calvary he lost. His reconnaissance on the enemy was severely lacking due a distinct shortage of horses.
Not just that, Napoleon lost his spark as a general, he wasnt the same general that everyone knew him. He was too focused on the government in Paris, and not focused at all in this battle, to the point that even among his generals arguing about him and his decisions one said out of anger "Napoleon is not the same man we knew"
@@michaelthorpe1869 100% 100,000 troops were heading to France, no way napoleon could have fought them off.
I wonder why they always invade Russia. Why not conquer Europe/the world first. Russia has the worst terrains.
This is one of the most articulate videos on the Waterloo Campaign I 've ever watched...It is indeed rare to find videos which focus on the most decisive factor that shapes history...the damn detail! Well done! Truly well done!
Thank you very much for the kind words. And thanks for taking the time to watch the video.
Epic history
Agreed.
The film "Waterloo" is very good too.
You should be studying how you lost the battle of endor 🤔
Exactly, this is the detail we need! Spies and marching orders, oh my! The things you normally have to go to the library to see. Amazing job!
"Merde!!!"
~ a random French soldier in the Napoleonic War
*General
Pierre Cambronne (general)
He went on record to say he never said that.
So France put it on his plaque. Lol.
Except he never said it lmao.
@Akainu Sakazuki94 or Fuck Off
In all the reading I've done on this campaign, authors are content only to describe Soult's "bungling" of the concentration orders. Your timeline and the associated maps are a stunning revelation on what might have happened. Thanks so much!
Thank you for watching.
In the 19th century, most who studied the campaign knew that something was off. Lettow-Vorbeck recognized the major flaw of June 12 and the subsequent delay to the campaign, but his work was largely ignored. Unfortunately, Stoffel died before publishing his history, and the draft was sold. (I have purchased this and it will be published in the next few years.) Soult so clearly failed, but the details were missing. Discovering two of his registries and Bertrand's registry from 1815 (along with d'Erlon's and a lot of other docs) provided the correspondence necessary to see the train-wreck in slow motion. Soult failed. But also Gerard failed. Ney/Reille/d'Erlon get too much blame for June 16 from those that analyze perfect intelligence rather than the actual communications and knowledge the French acted on.
We should remember however that victory was still well within Napoleon's grasp at Waterloo, and all hope had not yet been lost.
@@carrott36 Not really, Napoleon was doomed the moment that Grouchy failed to stop the Prussians at Wavre. Even if Napoleon had managed to beat Wellington before the Prussians arrived on the battlefield at 13:00, he still would not have had won a big victory but rather another costly tactical victory without strategic importance. Wellington would probably have retreated with the remains of his army to those 17,000 men he had left at Hall. So crushing the British army would not have been the end of the campaign, much less the end of the war itself. The Prussians would have been contend to either give battle or retreat and wait for the Russians and Austrians to cross into France, much like they did in 1814.
Many of us underestimate the importance of spies in war. Great generals are remembered but not great spies. Excellent video, this truly demonstrates the importance of intelligence in warfare. Could you please make some videos on famous spies in WW2? It would be pretty interesting. Marvelous video and hope to see more in the future. And what about Ain Jalut or my boy, Hannibal?
Thank you sir. WW2 topics will surely be done, there's just always a ton of projects floating around and I'm mostly a one-man team when it comes to production, animation, graphics, so it's a process :)
Take as much time as you need. Quality over quantity, mate.
Spies were not remembered because the point of being a spy is to be as subtle as possible
@@VentiVonOsterreich That is about knowing, but historical remembrance is still possible.
If spies are remembered, they were not good spies.
There were three major mistakes at Waterloo: 1) wasting good troops trying to take Hougoumont due to a miscommunication, 2) Marshal Ney wasting some of the best cavalry going against armed squares without first using cannon to break up the squares, and 3) Grouchy and his 30,000 troops not coming to support Napoleon when they heard the cannon, despite the pleas of his second-in-command. There was also some bad luck, with torrential rains softening the ground delaying the French deployment of the cannon and cavalry, and Napoleon being ill on the day of the battle.
This is about the campaign.
Ney has more guilt than he deserved
Napolein itself decided to send the guard cavalry to support the attack to then refuse to sent infantry that requested
Seems so simple today but I can only imagine how it was back then
I will take some popcorn, and I will come back!
Haha, enjoy the popcorn mate. Great to see you here!
AND YOU HAVE MY AXE!
....oh, wait, wrong forum....
@@siechamontillado It's never a wrong forum for axes! Hand me one while you're at it :)
@@HistoryMarche Giant Axe, War Axe, or Two Headed Axe? And while some of them are socketed, we'll have to do a Countess run for runewords... :9
@@siechamontillado ROFL!
The small details are truly what most people miss, but you are not one of them , well done my friend.
My understanding of this battle was that the Prussians arrived at the last minute, just as the old guard broke. I didn’t know the British and Prussian generals were so close that they were able to meet in person. Good video.
Prussians played a huge part in the outcome. They were the ones who were able to get information from French traitors about Napoleon's concentration 12h ahead of time, and they then hastily deployed to offset a disaster. But the main issue for Napoleon was the delay caused by the confusion of the two orders (Mons order and Charleroi order), he literally lost almost 2 days, which is huge. Had that confusion not occurred, the Prussians would not have been tipped off in time, and Napoleon would've been able to surprise and overwhelm the Prussian I Corps and move in between Wellington and Blucher, thus defeating the allies and forcing them to retreat. Instead, the Prussians managed to inform Wellington and the Allies managed to semi-organize for Napoleon's attack, ultimately defeating him at Waterloo.
I highly recommend you check out the books from Stephen Beckett about this topic. The volumes contain a wealth of information that isn't available anywhere in the world currently. There are pictures and analysis of documents that, until now, have been in private collections, so all of the information from those documents was not previously available and this information is critical for understanding the events that unfolded in the days prior to Waterloo.
Here's a link to his books www.mapleflowerhouse.com
@ Hehe, love the O'Hara reference :)
3 day old comment on a 1 minute old video... xd
@@Flejmon sponsors they are
@@Flejmon Patrons that donate a few bucks on Patreon get to see the video a few days earlier.
Pesky “Infiltrate” game feature. If only I could use the command comsole
Marshal Ney rage quit ...
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 Who's the real Napoleon?
@@jevinliu4658 Neither of us, were just history nerds
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 I don't believe you, you're definitely napoleon.
@@dr.vikyll7466 Damn it, recognized again!
It would be much better if the road network of the area is shown in the maps.. It was the configuration of the roads which dictated the battle plan..
Especially when it’s pouring down.
Not to mention all other "divine interventions" like that rain happened the night before the battle, the sudden absence of Napoleon during the battle because of his illness. You don't see things like these happened in Austerlitz . It appears that Fortuna herself didn't want Napoleon to win.
Napoleon was never sick, people point to his conditions and say he was ill but it seems this was not the case upon further examination. I’d recommend the book ‘Waterloo’ by Andrew W. Field.
@@carrott36 Napoleon suffered from ulcer and stomach cancer.
@@numa5810 Source?
@@carrott36 autopsy report
@@numa5810 Yes, and an autopsy won’t tell us of Napoleon’s condition at Waterloo, only when he died.
A very interesting perspective. Without the spies and confusion, Napoleon would have gained an easier march on Brussels. But with them he fought two major engagements...Ligny and Waterloo. At Waterloo, the French were tactically incompetent. Cavalry against formed squares, not disabling the Allied cannon, not burning Hougoumont, not beginning battle earlier or even scouting out the direction of Blucher's withdrawl from Ligny. They even messed up D'Erlon's march onto the Prussian rear...which would have achieved a decisive victory at Ligny. However, would this have been a pin prick on an elephant if Napoleon had won? He still had to face Russian and Austrian armies? I feel his only victory would have been to prolong the war.
This is great, HistoryMarche the machine gun of quality!
Thanks mate! Can't wait to see what you conjured up for our next collaboration... shhh :)
@@HistoryMarche Something is brewing.... !
Hoc Est Bellum where are the videos?!
@@arandomwalk they are on their way..!
The only bad thing is the machine ,,speaking"
Congratulations, you have moved the notch of quality and attention to detail to almost academic level. I have never watched this detailed account of any historic battle. Please keep this way.
Thank you sir. Actually, Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public.
But thanks to Stephen, who persuaded many of these rich private collectors to share the documents, we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information.
Thank you very much for watching.
HistoryMarche thank you for your reply. I have always been obsessed with Napoleon’s victories and era in general and read different books. I will most definitely buy the books by Mr Stephen. Thank you both, give us more of Napoleon)))
Nice, you beat kings and Generals to it.
I think epic history tv did a video about the battle of waterloo already
This isn't so much a video about the battle of Waterloo itself, but a video about the *days leading up to the battle of Waterloo*, and how military and intelligence operations impacted the outcome of the battle itself.
@@HistoryMarche
And it was very informative and a fresh perspective that we often don't see in those types of clips so I thank you and your team for it.... Still it is fun to troll K&G
@@morningmidnight9398 nice video but Kings and Generals is still my favourite
@@morningmidnight9398 Indeed, most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has manage to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections. These documents contain orders, correspondence, reports, intelligence gathering, reports about spies, etc, thus providing new, never-before-seen, evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video).
“If Berthier had been there, I would not have met this misfortune.”
~Napoleon
As I understand it, Marshal Berthier was the aide who composed most of Napoleon's orders into written form. Napoleon was (or so I understand) very confusing when giving verbal orders and Berthier had a knack for piecing together what Napoleon really meant. When Napoleon returned from exile, Berthier didn't rejoin him, and the confusion in orders could be due to having someone translating the verbal orders into written form who wasn't experienced or completely understanding of how to do that translating.
Berthier ‘fell’ out of a window
I mean…he was dead
At Waterloo, the French were betrayed when a cuirassier deserted to the Allies and warned them of the impending attack of Napoleon's Imperial Guard, half an hour in advance. Wellington was able to shorten his lines in response.
expert
I had not heard this before ....where did you learn this??
@@LtBrown1956
Check out these books.
"The Battle A New History of Waterloo" by Alessandro Barbero.
"Waterloo Myth and Reality" Gareth Glover.
@@expertstrategy
thanks
I will
That's very interesting. While this very well done episode of HistoryMarche certainly explains how N.'s initial plan failed; the battle at Waterloo itself was not a foregone conclusion. There must be more to it.
The final attack of the imperial guard was mounted by the middle guard, and followed by the old guard. The attack swept away a lot of wellingtons forces, routing British foot guards, Dutch artillery, highlands regiments and various other units. It was finally beaten back by a bayonet charge by British infantry and fled, the old guard stood their ground however and did not break.
Winners propaganda portrays the attack as the old guard getting routed by hidden redcoats. Far from reality
Somebody give this channel a shoutout, so that we can get more high quality and detailed videos
Thank you for a great video, i love learning about the background of battles.
The Napoleonic era is also one of my favorites.
Wow, as a die hard enthusiast of the Napoleonic Era I didn't know many of these details! Extremely interesting! Thanks for the great stuff, interested in seeing more of your content. Happy 205th anniversary of Waterloo too!
The details really matter. It is where success or failure is hinged. This video is truly enlightening. Thank you 😀
Thank you sir.
I swear, I'm in love with your documentarys!
Great as always, hannibal?
It's coming :)
@@HistoryMarche I'm waiting for cannae
Wow! Okay I’ve watched a ton of videos on Waterloo but none focus on the events that led to the battle. Great work!
Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
HistoryMarche Thank you very much, I’ll take a look!
A masterpiece. This film is worth a lot of monet. A brilliant art.
Thank you sir.
Forgotten fact is Wellington said later that if he had his army of the Peninsula campaign at Waterloo he would have gone on the attack instead of the defensive/holding battle he fought.
The bulk had been sent to america. Some died in the battle of New Orleans. One of the worst British defeats.
@@theodoresmith5272 Your correct the bulk were in America as for New Orleans that defeat was down to the incompetence of a senior, (non Peninsula), officer who neglected orders to equip his men with scaling ladders, a similar action on a different part of the battlefield where ladders were issued resulted in the British taking the position. Irony was the war was over before this battle even started.
@Евгений Иванов I suggest you read up on Wellingtons objectives for the battle:) His army was a mix of different nationalities, (only 24,000 were British), hastily assembled and outnumbered and his aim from the start was to hold the ground until the Prussians arrived which thanks to his pre planning & actions he did.
As for the British they defeated the French firstly in Portugal and then on into Spain and at Waterloo when the Middle Guard advanced on the British, (Wellington grouped all the British to face them), they defeated them as well. Simple fact is the Guards could have done what they've done before and snatched victory from defeat but at Waterloo the British Guards, (unlike the Russians, Prussians & Austrians in other battles), stood their ground and poured disciplined volleys of fire into their ranks, all they had to do was break the British line, they couldn't.
Napoleon didn't expect this as he'd never faced Redcoats before, (although he had been defeated at Acre by Sir Sidney Smith of the RN), his Generals and dare I say soldiers many of who were veterans of Spain had faced the British before and new of their fighting prowess.
@@tonyjames5444 I'm well versed in the battle details. You forgot to mention that the British artillery lost against the American artillery the day before. Also rhe americans killed most of the officers.
It wasn't it not just the one officer who forgot the ladders but all of them that didn't figure it out before the battle started. 3 generals and 7 colonels killed along with 2000 troops seems like more went wrong then forgetting ladders.
All that damage was inflicted buy a band off non soldiers.
The British always have an excuse for major loses.
Vs the Zulu it was the ammo boxes didnt open.
Wellington has his own disaster rarely mentioned but his retreat from burgos was a disaster.
@@theodoresmith5272 Actually the artillery duel as you call it ended because the British ran out of ammunition and American records show defenders on the left of their line had broken and ran.
As for the ladders it is accepted by all that Colonel Mullins was to blame and as for the British casualties Mullins errors and the determination of the British to press on with the attack, (admired by the defenders), made these inevitable.
As previously stated Thornton's 85th Brigade who were a separate force did overwhelm and take the line on the western side of the river and its accepted by many that with better organisation and coordination the British would have won the battle.
As for your childish rant about Wellington every military commander has set backs, I could mention the US failings in Canada or some of Washingtons from the Revolutionary war.
(ps I served 27 years in the Royal Marines and did a number of exchanges in the US and my statements on New Orleans were backed up by what I was told by American guides during a battlefield tour in 1998:)
End of chat.
I think you became the best history chanell on RUclips.
That's a very high praise. Thank you sir.
@@sunnyjim1355 who the fuck cares u dumbass
Thank you for brightening up my day! But seriously though,the animation and narration are top notch. A big bravo to you!
I just found out that this video is based on the book WATERLOO BETRAYED by Stephen Beckett. Very entertaining and enlightening but needs to be read critically according to one book reviewer.
Indeed it is. In fact Stephen Beckett and I collaborated on this video. Stephen wrote the script for the video and was participating in the production as well. And, speaking of his books, they're nothing short of spectacular - 15+ years worth of research.
This is incorrect. Waterloo Betrayed was released in 2015, and revealed some of these details. The basis of this video was the 2018 publication based on the discovery of hundreds of new pieces of French correspondence, most from private collections. That work has been met with universal acclaim as it has rewritten the campaign. It proved some of Waterloo Betrayed, but disproved other elements.
I'm French but in response to this very honest report, I would say that the British infantry also did show this day an incredible courage and resistance in defense. All the old soldiers know that the defense is not always easier than the offense. In offense you marche because everybody march, no choice! In defense you see masses coming at you .. and to stand and stay need a huge control on yourself! Much respect for the "habits rouges"!
they have no courage in needing 7 whole coalitions and permanent presence of their allies to win against their oldest rival
@@myasuujo3330 Britain was the only country to faiths against Napoleon near constantly, even when he had all of Europe under his thumb Britain still fought on, and let’s not forget the reason why so many coalitions were formed against France is because France had a massive population
@@myasuujo3330 Britain was the only country to faiths against Napoleon near constantly, even when he had all of Europe under his thumb Britain still fought on, and let’s not forget the reason why so many coalitions were formed against France is because France had a massive population
@@lesdodoclips3915 It helps when there's a sea and large channel in the way - in between Britain and the French fearsome land-based war machine.
@@BaronsHistoryTimes that’s a convenient way of saying the Royal Navy
The battle of Waterloo was not fought in Waterloo. Wellington was staying in a hotel in Waterloo and wrote his victory letter from there, and thus, the battle was known as the battle of Waterloo. The actual battle was fought down the road from Waterloo. Wellington and the Allies were on the ridge at Mount St. Jean. Farmlands stretched southward toward the village of Plancenoit. Napoleon sat upon a horse on a small ridge that led into the village. The battle was fought on farmland which was freshly plowed and and very wet. It rains in Belgium almost every night. Thus, the greatest artillery in the world, Napoleon's, was hard pressed to be effective. The cannon balls would embed in the muck as opposed to skimming along the ground and ploughing into the ranks of the Brits and allies. There is a farmhouse on the road in the midst of the battle. 1000 allies took position behind the walls and in the house creating a crossfire on the French as they charged up the hill.
I live in Plancenoit for 4 years and drove across the battlefield everyday on the way to work. The Butte de Leon sits on the ridge with the Lion facing France almost as dare for the French to not return.
Thank you for your input..much appreciated 🙂
well we can't really call it the "Battle of down the road from Waterloo" can we?
To be fair, most battles named for cities are named as such because they were fought NEAR said city, not IN the city
History Marche. You guys need to cover Napoleons first Italian campaign as there is nothing decent on it out there.
We just might. Thanks for the suggestion, and thank you for watching.
@Sue MartinoKings and Generals has nothing on his first Italian campaign.
epic hisotry TV has some top quality
@@jbvalentin854 Yeah I love Epic History.
If you anderstand french, there are good videos on this topic from the youtube channel "surlechamp". The italian campagne is very interesting because it is the place where Napoléon had tried new things.
Non bias history lessons. Glad that I found this channel!🙂
Thank you sir. Welcome to the channel.
Glad you referred to Wellington's army as the Anglo-Dutch army. Not seldom is the Dutch contribution to the final campaign overlooked.
It was actually anglo dutch german. One third each
Anglo-Dutch is also kinda misleading, as „Germans“ (of course back then there was no united Germany) outnumbered the Dutch and made up the largest troop contingent of the allied army under Wellington.
@@HingerlAlois So it was really the Anglo-Hannoverian-Hessian-Dutch-Belgian Army :p
@@Vrelk Try English, Dutch/Belgium, Hanover, Nassau, Brunswick army.
It was a non french army
The true hero of Waterloo:
David Hendrik Chassé
In 1815 he distinguished himself as commander of the 3rd Division at the Battle of Waterloo. During this battle, the division was initially positioned entirely on the right flank, around the village of Braine-l'Alleud. Soon the order came to position themselves in reserve behind the center of the Allied line. Chassé noticed that the British troops ahead of him were fleeing and the artillery was no longer firing. He soon saw that Napoleon was sending the Imperial Guard towards the center; He then ordered his artillery to take position and fire on the enemy, while in the meantime he had Colonel Detmers' brigade lined up in columns for the counterattack. After a short firefight he opened the attack on the French guard, who eventually had to give way. Detmers' brigade continued the attack, driving the French Guard from a last position at La Haye Sainte and pursuing the fleeing French as far as the Maison du Roi at Plancenoit, where they encountered Prussian troops.
To the horror of Chassé and his officers, the Duke of Wellington made no mention of the attack by Chassé's division in his report. Despite assurances from British general Lord Hill, who recognized the Dutch role in the battle of Waterloo, this omission was never corrected.
King William I appointed Chassé Commander of the Military William Order on July 8, 1815 because of his services in Waterloo.[3]
He was praised by Napoleon after the Battle of Waterloo.
Yeah I know that story. That’s why history made by the English is fantasy.
No just a general doing his duty. Don't make out his effort to help repel the Guard right at the end was the sole reason Waterloo was won . He was the enemy in Spain only a few years before
It was Zieten coming from the Left flank that secured that flank freeing British troops to reinforce Wellingtons centre.
I keep coming back to this video, I love it. This type of information is much needed to understand the flow of events.
"I've had this piece of land in my pocket for a very long time."
-The Duke of Wellington
"We must consolidate, consolidate! We'll train our men on the march!"
- Napoleon Bonaparte
"Give me night or give me Blücher"
-Arthur Wellesley, the Iron Duke.
You can assume the land as did Wellington. As he said, he had this particular position in his mind for a very long time. But Napoleon still pressed him to the very edge of Defeat. He prayed and received Blucher. A very lucky catch. All the spies in the world cannot defeat a great army on the field of battle. Napoleon came within a hair's breath of achieving victory at Waterloo. Blucher, in his sustained hatred of Napoleon, marched relentlessly to the aid of Wellington and Grouchy simply was not up to the challenge of blocking the Prussian's march.
This piece of land, I might have guessed may be the field at Waterloo. According to 1970 film about the battle. Wellington said to his officers over a table at Brussels "I have observed this field there at Waterloo" meaning he had seen the field a few months ago and guessed it is perfect for a battle.
@@americanworkingsteel8062 However, it should be remembered that Waterloo was Wellington's victory. It was his plan that the Anglo-Dutch and Prussian armies combine forces and defeat Napoleon. This was what eventually happened, but much later in the day than Wellington would have liked. So the praying for Blucher was more to do with Blucher's arrival time, rather than hoping Blucher would even show up.
Bluchers delay was caused by issues with the Prussians marching through the rearguard at Wavre, then untangling their corps and marching across from Wavre to La Belle Alliance on secondary roads. Initially Wellington expected the Prussians to make an appearance around 11:00am, but they didn't start making their presence felt for another 5 hours. This meant that Wellington spent the first half of the battle fending off French assaults with what amounted to a 2nd rate army (many British units contained many unblooded troops, the Dutch units were considered of dubious loyalty). The arrival of Zieten's corps on the left flank of the Anglo-Dutch army allowed Wellington to shift units from there to the centre of the field in time to meet the attack of the Imperial Guard, while the other two corps under Blucher sapped the strength of the final attack by siphoning off the Young Guard and other units.
Although Grouchy is blamed for not showing up, it's not like he didn't try. Part of the problem is that Grouchy swung his corps too far east, so when he finally figured out where Blucher was, he was on the wrong side of the Prussian army facing a rearguard covering river crossings. Also, for all that history blames him, Grouchy actually received orders from Napoleon at 2:00pm that were dictated at around 11:00am by the Emperor telling him to continue chasing the Prussians. So Napoleon did himself in the neck not only by underestimating Wellington's abilities, but also by reinforcing an order the kept his last possible reserve of troops off on a wild goose chase.
As far as Napoleon winning, that is up to debate. I rather like what one historian said, which was that Napoleon might have won at Waterloo, but it would have been a pyrrhic victory that would have left his army in ruins. Plus, given the Duke of Wellington's experience in offense and defense, it is likely that the Anglo-Dutch army would have survived to fight another day, while Napoleon was starting to scrape the bottom of the manpower barrel.
This one is the finest among all that I have read in past ...Great work makers
Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
How intriguing would it be had Napoleon not been betrayed from within nor had Soult been in the correct place to receive the orders and there was no delay to Napoleon's plans. Things could have been very different. Amazing video and I learned so much about Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. He really was a genius tactician and France's greatest emperor.
Johnny Nguyen
Given that several hundred thousand soldiers of Austria, Russia, various German countries etc. were on the march towards France it didn’t really matter what happens at Waterloo Napoleon was going to lose the war anyway.
@@HingerlAlois Not necessarily. Napoleon won all the previous coalition wars against him against superior numbers. The french army at the time was arguably better in training and tactics than the allies, even than Prussia.
Johnny Nguyen
Not really, he had a lot of allies (Germans, Poles, Italians,...) who increased the numbers of his army and helped him win his wars.
In 1815 he had no allies and pretty much entire Europe against him at the same time, the allies had almost one million soldiers available for their attack on France, at Waterloo he fought against one tenth of the allied forces.
HingerlAlois he had those allies after 1807 and even then they mainly helped in the invasion of Russia
French victories like Marengo and Austerlitz, Jena-Ouerstadt were primarily French victories
Though their allies did no doubt help
Fraser Whyte
He had allies already before 1807.
For example in the Second Napoleonic War in 1805 he had basically southern Germany (Bavaria, Württemberg,...) as well as some other states (Spain, Italy, parts of the Netherlands) as allies that increased his available troop numbers.
In 1815 he had pretty much entire Europe against him and no allies at all.
He had never faced a situation as bad as the one in 1815.
Please more napoleonic content! You do such a great job, along with epic history tv
He was just outnumbered, the man was exceptional, and Im from the UK so no bias.
This is your best video to date, the attention to detail is admirable, and it was an enjoyable and fresh take on Waterloo. Well done!
Thank you very much. Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public.
But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information.
Thank you very much for watching.
@@HistoryMarche Thank you for the reply, Waterloo is such an battle and campaign to study, and Mr. Beckett's new book will definitely be something I will have to read!
The spies are an aspect always overlooked. Good vid
When you said thunderclap, my spine shivered...
Wow new content! Thank u so much!
Well done. I am always surprised, that I learn new things about well known topics when watching your videos. Thank you so much for providing intelligent and informative entertainment for us. Keep up the great work ❤️👍🏻
So nice of you
A Series on Alexander's Battles but with more details would be awesome!
That's definitely part of my plans!
@@HistoryMarche alexander macedonian 🇲🇰
I really like the emphasis on details, great job
You spoil us HistoryMarche.
I love how this video, in a short time, mentions all the details that led to the defeat at Waterloo
As the Great Man said "It was a close- run thing "
Fun fact is that Jerome (Napoleon brother) heard about the prussians plan to help Wellington, but Napoleon, after the victory of Ligny, thought that the Prussians would not fight again.
This era is the most fascinating history of Europe in my opinion, all of Europe declared war not to France but Napoleon himself! He really deserves his own era.
And as usual, another magnificent video historymarche!
That how much they fear him.
2 of the 7 coalitions xars happened before Napoleon took charge
Totally agree. Most fascinating period of history. French Revolution + Napoleon period. Then the reactionary forces tried to erase the heritage of this period but their efforts were doomed.
Love this channel, thank you for putting up all these wonderful videos!
Thank you for watching.
As a historian I can say your content is as true to history as it can be. Your research and presentation of said research is impeccable. I would love to see you do an episode on Jumonville Glen.
Why did the French soldiers betray him?
I enjoy the way you break the battels down and go step by step. With that break down, I am actually able to understand what happened with a deep understand rather than just saying they won or lost and your Michael the brave 5 part series was really amazing I have never heard of him, and his exploits through the three kingdoms and the short series was excellent.
Thank you very much for the kind words. I truly appreciate the feedback.
Also he includes the movement of the armies before the battle and the fight for positions which are often far more important than sometimes simplistic battle tactics especially in ancient or medieval battles . The videos he did on the Caesar campaigns are a great example of that. It gives you an actual understanding of the decisive advantages which were gained .
I often thought about that while playing Total war games, issuing countless mini tactical orders to specific troops. Actual battles were not like that because this level of control is impossible for a real general , so what made great generals great ? The things which happened before the actual battle tactics, at least in ancient or medieval armies .
Love your videos man, keep them coming!!
Great video, never knew the role which treachery played in the campaign. Can’t wait for Ain Jalut and Cannae.
I've never seen this side of Waterloo before, nicely done!
We often overlook the enormous amount of smaller details like this
Really interesting channel. Subbed!
Welcome aboard.
I love the art in this video (for the map and battle map). Very detailed, yet pleasing to the eye. Hard to come by these days.
Thank you very much.
Bravo absolute quality, subscribed.
Thank you sir. Welcome to the channel.
Thank you again HM, that is an unknown story, i learned a lot !
Anyone else here because of how badass the epic history channel is? They sent me here and as I assumed I would be, I am impressed.
Insane voiceover! Love it.
Thank you. The information is new to me and the presentation well done.
Thank you very much for watching. Most of the information in this video was actually not available to the worldwide public until now. Stephen Beckett's research has managed to dig up a TON of contemporary documents that were, until now, in private collections (these include, letters, military reports, intelligence reports, variouis military orders, correspondence between generals, reports about spies, excerpts from personal diaries of the people involved, etc. and all of these documents are originals from 1814 and 1815). And it's these original documents that providing new, never-before-seen evidence about the days leading up to the Battle of Waterloo, which weren't available to the public until now. I highly recommend you check out Stephen's books, there are four in-depth books + a 5th one that is a summary. I used the 5th book + Stephen's own notes (we collaborated together on this video). Here's the link to his work www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
@@HistoryMarche Thank you.
There are valleys in Iowa settled by veterans of Napoleon's armies, little out of the way spots that my father took us to in the 1960's on various family outings. He knew of these places through his work as a surveyor/civil engineer for the Milwaukee Railroad. Somehow seeing to where those men came to to start life anew made that history real.
@@lynnwood7205 Heh, that's an awesome bit of trivia. Thanks man.
Thanks for the video.
This was brilliant, as always!
This is one of my favorite channels ever
VERY INFORMATIVE, ENJOYED THEM MUCH. Sure appreciate these videos.
Thank you very much for watching.
What a brilliant video!!!
I was pretty ecstatic when I saw a video from you guys about Waterloo. Intruiging stuff, Id never heard of this theory and it is really fascinating. Thanks for another masterful video guys!
Thank you very much. Much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, deception, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. Stephen's books contain ORIGINAL contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. written by Napoleon, Bertrand, Soult, Fouche, and many more officials that played a part in 1815, and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public.
But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these new facts in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/ The new information uncovered shows that the biggest factor that caused Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo was, arguably, the confusion with the two orders (Mons and Charleroi orders), if Napoleon wasn't delayed he would've surprised the Allies + the traitors and spies all contributed to giving the Allies vital information.
You hit this out of the park!
Thank you sir
Excellent video. Really outstanding. Well done.
Thank you very much!
well researched thank you .
How perfect! I just got done with the Age of Victoria’s three hour podcast on this battle ! Now to see it in action. Thanks!
Hey man! Thanks! Means a lot coming from you!
i made fries , i took my beer from the fridge ,and press the "play" button ...for this new episode! yeaaay !
Hey mate, thank you very much for watching. Always great to see you in the comment section.
Bloody traitors.
But was you who betrayed the republic, monarchy, Spain and the Catholic faith and come to speak of treason?
@@Ragnarok__ Catholic faith lol.
@@Ragnarok__ He didn't betray Spain.He just placed on the Spanish throne his brother Joseph Bonaparte and he sent french forces to Spain (in1808) to just re-organise the country.If you read and study about the Peninsular war you will find out that Joseph Bonaparte had many supporters from the big towns of Spain.The rebellions had started to the villages and small towns from UNEDUCATED people.They were fighting for a king that lived and ate to Paris like an Emperor(I am talking about Ferdinand VII).As for the Republic you can just say that he never betrayed the ideas of the French Revolution and that he expanded them to all Europe which means that he helped the Republic.I don't know what exactly you mean saying that he betrayed the Monarchy.Just think about it when he became the first Consul he invited many nobles to come back to France and he helped church.
@@josephchristopherdeboulogn2365 uneducated or no, there were many good reasons for the Spanish to fight against the French dictatorship that controlled Spain during napoleons reign.
"Cowards and traitors will be shot!"
Great video thanks! A battle I've always been interested in, collecting books and maps and have painted hundreds of miniature soldiers of the battle including Napoleon and the French, British and Prussians. 🎖🎖👍
Great video and superb narrator 🥃
I feel playing Europa Universalis IV with live commentator dlc in this channel
Very brilliant video. I noticed something about Napoleon which I'm sure everybody else has noticed also. It seems Napoleon holds a certain spell over people, people who hate him and people who love him, myself included. Just scroll down the comment section on this video and you will see what I mean then compare it to say Hannibal videos you guys have made, people are very rarely neutral about Napoleon, there is something so fascinating about him.
Same with Hitler, another fascinating individual, but lets not confuse fascination with admiration!
@@pgrothschild Napoleon was literally nothing like Hitler at all and it is incredibly ignorant to make a comparison of the two.
@@Thin_Mercury I never said Napoleon was literally like Hitler. And why is it ignorant to draw similarities between them? Both held a certain spell over people, both have people that love and hate them and both individuals divide people till this day. What am I missing?
@@pgrothschild Many more people respect and love Napoleon nowadays then Hitler. Napoleon is actually a great hero in many countries like Poland, Greece, Germany and the Balkans. It is only Britain who teaches savagely anti Napoleon stuff in schools though I'm sure he has many fans there also. Hitler however is literally despised by every country in the world, even Germany and Winston Churchill always said Napoleon was a man of many virtues, though like all of us he was not perfect.
Jackson Mulrooney I’m from the UK and we were not taught to dislike Napoleon we were were just taught about him end of story.
Epic history is already covering Napoleons campaigns and already covered waterloo BUT this is a very different and interesting look at it.
*sorry to clarify I watch a bunch of history on youtube, i'm just worried many channels are going to cover the exact same thing, but if they have different takes on the same events that's cool.
Thank you sir. Yes, Epic History TV and I are collaborating on the series on his channel. I'm very much part of that project :)
HistoryMarche is making the battle maps and the animations in EpicHistory's series for Napoleon.
@@hocestbellumchannel Yes, sorry to clarify I watch a bunch of history on youtube, i'm just worried many channels are going to cover the exact same thing, but if they have different takes on the same events that's cool.
HistoryMarche you make very good animations and the music is very good 👍🏼
Some people ask : what if Napoleon would have won at Waterloo ? He might have but his enemies had much more resources than him , another battle would have follow , and another one and the great corsicane , eventually ,would have lost .A single person can't rule Europe , not forever ,and you won battles building bridges not walls .
If it’s possible are you guys thinking of doing a video series on the hundred days campaign?
Amazing detail!!
Fantastic! I like the analysis and description of context/background events rather than just a retelling of the battle.
Thank you sir. Indeed, the events in the days prior to the battle were, imo, just as important as the battle itself. The two are intricately linked.
I really like the graphics of your videos so beautiful keep up the good work still waiting for hannibal or more medieval france
I'm working on the battle of Ain Jalut now, should be finished in a few weeks hopefully. Also Hannibal should be coming in September.
Great vid, 👏👏 gives a new perspective on the battle of Waterloo
The trivia at the end puts into question the entire documentary
Excellent video, as always! I never knew of this.
Michael the Brave pt. 3? :)
Thank you sir. Actually, much of the information in this video has not been available anywhere in the world until now. I collaborated on this project with writer Stephen M. Beckett II who has done extensive research on the days leading up to the battle of Waterloo, and how espionage, backroom politics, etc. all played a part in the outcome of the battle of Waterloo. His books contain contemporary letters, documents, orders, reports, intelligence gatherings, etc. and all of these original documents from 1814 and 1815 were, until now, in private collections, not available to the public. But thanks to Stephen we were able to present some of these in this video, but there is much more to be found in his books. I couldn't recommend his work enough. If you want to check it out here's the link www.mapleflowerhouse.com/
As for Mihai, There's a lot of research material for Michael the Brave p3, more than the first two parts combined. So it'll take some time to complete.
@@HistoryMarche I may have to do just that, it's very interesting! I appreciate your response and hard work. You've quickly become one of the best channels. I look forward to the next one!
Intelligence and Logistics, every time.
Is it possible that Grouchy also betrayed him? After all, he was supposed to keep the Prussians in check.
Beautifully made clip. Imagination is such a superior form of learning. And that's what you guys do, you bring imagination to life.
After all, "a picture is worth a thousand words."
Thank you very much :)
Grouchy was engaged with a Prussian Army at the battle of Wavre. He thus was unable to come to Waterloo. He won that battle on the same day as Napoleon lost Waterloo. Grouchy did his job well, but Napoleon failed.
@@schusterlehrling You said, "he was unable to come to waterloo". My point exactly, which only raises the possibility.
@@DaS-rh2ji you wrote Groucy betrayed Napoleon by not coming to Waterloo, and when I point out he was engaged in a battle the very same day, you wrote that was your point. No, your point was that Groucy betrayed Napoleon, which is clearly not the case.
@@schusterlehrling Grouchy was chasing Blucher, which means he was on Blucher's tail. If he were truly engaged, then Blucher wouldn't have been able to reach Waterloo. Yet Blucher pours into napoleon's right flank. Again I only raised its possibility.
Superb documentaries. I would like to see the Dacian-Roman War one day
He should have played defensive not offensive this time.
Is very strange that a master of the wars made those mistakes.
Like he said " If you fight long enough with your enemies they would learn your art of war".
They learned it.
He said also " you should change your tactics every 10 years"
He forgot his quotes.
Respect to Napoleon.
He was part of those rare people that try to reach the stars and fail because of their over extended ambitions.
A great man.
Playing defensive would have done nothing but assured his defeat, he needed to try and knock out some of the enemy forces to even the odds and buy him time for new troops to be mobilized