I think 19th century Generals would have KILLED to get such a battelfield overview. Today we ask "Why didn't he exploit this gap or that open flank?", but back then the flow of information was just so slow and unreliable. Most units just spend the most time waiting for orders like that block of french soldiers in the rear that did not move for 9 hours.
@@tomhath8413that is true, though to a much smaller extent, especially if a major war was to break out. At that point both sides have their agents, satellites, drones, recon etc which removes most the issues. You can see it in Ukraine to an extent.
well i think the most brave moment, was charge of french cavalry lead by Ney (it was here we lost battle because of the error of ney to charge without support of gun and infantry) but well if we talk of couradge it was here. 5k to 6k horseman, heavy and light cavalry, cuirrasiers, charging without fear english square formation. and they were close to succeed to break in at first assault, they went away and reformed and went in again, in fact they did that several time, the best visual representation of that was in the film waterloo of the director Bondartchouk
It would have looked more interesting to be able to tell cavalry from infantry, especially when the British & Netherlands troops formed squares & the French cavalry rode around them more than once to no great effect.
The Prussian Forces under Blucher were the main forces that defeated Napoleon. The battle took place not near Waterloo but 4.5km away . After the war British propaganda under Wellington promoted it as a primarily British victory. Diorama's created after the event actually removed the Prussians to show it as a primarily British victory. So I'd say this is false history.
@@allistaircampbell9282 bitter little frenchman lol. Wellington was a hero for absolutely destroying the French in Spain long before he slapped Nappy in the face at waterloo. Britain was France's nemesis, Napoleon could have had peace a few times if it wasnt for our determination to keep making war on him. :)
Spent five years maintaining the AV kit illuminating the wonderful Sibourne Model of Waterloo at the National Army Museum, London. That thing was truly epic in itself and the new narrative was excellent, but nothing can display the ebb and flow of the battle like this. A masterpiece!
The Sibourne Diorama is no longer as it was originally created, is it? Wellington himself ensured that most of the Prussian troops were removed from it in order to make his own victory more glorious...
@@MrGieltedze Yes and no. The original Sibourne model was very carefully researched, but was never allowed to be publicly displayed in the UK. He simply showed too many Prussian troops on the battlefield, and Wellington personally intervened and corrected this in his favor and had most of them removed so that it later corresponded to his story - the Prussians would only have appeared when Wellington had practically won the battle alone, and then only with very little Prussian support. Of course, the British are very happy to believe this story and spread it as such.
A new presentation of the battle I had not previously encountered - the movement makes so much more sense of all of those static plans one usually sees - I found myself on the edge of my seat waiting for "Le garde recule!" - Well done, thank you for your work creating this.
it was quite interesting to see the real distance that la garde had to face, before reaching wellington's position. after their attack fails, the rest is history.
According to Google Earth the distance they had to march was roughly 2200 meters, which according to the video took them 30 mins. This yields a marching speed of about 4.4 km/h (normal walking speed), however they had to walk up an incline and in formation, while being battered by enemy artillery.
Tout dépend de la position que tu choisis pour parler de "départ". La garde fit, semble-t'il un arrêt un peu au sud-ouest de la ferme de la Haye-Sainte poir se former en carré pour monter au contact des lignes anglo-alliées. Qu'appelles-tu "wellington's position" ? The first line of fire or the all army stand or the place where the Duke was at that moment of the battle ?...
I can't wait until we can implement Google Maps with Augmented Reality so we can visit the physical locations and watch a full battle take place like we were actually there.
You can easily get killed while walking the battlefield. There are roads where cars are traveling very fast and cannot see pedestrians. VR might save a life!
@@HochundDeutschyapster ya i thought that it was something like that i was just joking ofc respect to the fallen ones who sacrifieced them selfs to help others retreat to safety
Blücher played a decisive role in the victory at Waterloo. It was Blücher who struck Napoleon in the rear. In addition, Blucher had an army of more than 50 thousand. In general, the Allies at Waterloo had a twofold superiority over Napoleon. But the decisive thing was that Napoleon had no reserves. For example, Napoleon lost the battle of Aspern-Essling in May 1809, but thanks to his reserves he won the next battle and the entire company. At Waterloo, Napoleon had limited resources. In addition, Napoleon lost all the veterans, that is, the “best of the best,” in 1812. and this is a bit of a “half-million-strong army,” which was not enough for Napoleon to remain in the statue of Emperor of Europe.
I am afraid my friend you may have been misguided, the prussians only had a fraction of their initial numbers as napoleon had already dealt with them the previous week. The french stood as the largest single army at that particular moment.
@@charleythom8031 What battle are we talking about, the Battle of Ligny? There Blucher had over 90 thousand soldiers, of whom he lost about 16-20 thousand. Open any article about Waterloo, there is a specific figure: 50 thousand soldiers for Blucher and 68 thousand soldiers for Wellington, versus 72-73 thousand for Napoleon. 118-120 thousand allies against 73 thousand French. In addition, a huge army of Austrians and Russians was coming from the east, Napoleon was initially doomed to a second abdication of power. The decisive events that led to the end of Napoleon happened in Russia in 1812 and in the largest battle in history at Leipzig in 1813, and at Waterloo the allies finished off a lion whose claws and fangs had already been torn out.
I think Wellington fought for time, and he did so successfully against a larger (not by much, in truth) army. He was successful in this regard, in that he achieved his strategic goals, where lesser commanders could have failed as they regularly had done in the past.
@@ОлексійБойко-з5г The Prussians lost 16,000 men in Ligny, but the French also lost 12,000 men, and Napoleon was even forced to use his old guard there to force victory. Deducting these losses and the deserters from the Rhineland contingents, formerly allies of Napoleon, around 95,000 Prussian soldiers still arrived in Wavre. Of these, 14,000 soldiers stayed there under Gerneral Thielmann to involve Grouchy and his 33,000 Frenchmen in fighting and keep them away from the battlefield in Waterloo, the remaining 80,000 men marched to Waterloo. By the end of the battle, around 50,000 Prussians had taken part in the fighting, while 30,000 men were still on the march there. The Prussians had more artillery than Napoleon, and more and far better cavalry than the French, and their ammunition supplies were still full when they appeared on the battlefield, while the French's were almost exhausted. Incidentally, only about half of the entire Prussian army was gathered there under Blücher, because the other half was still in Prussia ready to march on France together with the Russians and Austrians.
Napoleon also had over 100 pieces of artillery more than Wellington's army ... personally I have always been of the opinion that Napoleon was overrated ... he through numbers at battles ... God is on the side of the big battalions as Voltaire said ... he had superiority in guns ... he did not value the life of his men ... he lost 500k men in the east
You should've included the flags of all units from the Dutch, Hannoverian and other German states armies. About half of Wellington's Anglo-allied army wasn't British. This fact is often overlooked in representations of the battle.
yes, in fact "the greatest military victory in British history" is in reality not a British victory at all, 3/4 of Wellington's army was made up of Germans and Dutch. And without the arrival of the Prussians, Wellington would surely fall back. Anyway, history has proven that the Anglo-Saxons were masters in the art of rewriting history for propaganda purposes. A bit like the famous Americans who liberated Europe, when in reality the Soviets had already defeated the German army before a single American set foot in Europe.
@@leznipe1164 the sacrifice of the Soviet people has been immeasurable and they've played a mayor part in defeating the Germans. But Soviet propaganda also likes to forget that without US lend lease aid they probably wouldn't have made it. We all like to be the hero but the large scale conflicts like WW2 and the Napoleonic wars weren't won by the efforts of one single nation. While national histories often focus on their part of a conflict, we should try to see the bigger picture. This isn't a problem of "Anglo-Saxons" alone.
Would take *a lot* of research to show where those units were, interspersed as they were in Wellington's line. And arguments from some historians about placement would ensue.
It's more for clarity. speaking of uniforms and the allies: "There then occurred one of those tragic incidents of war in which men die in error at the hands of friends. Seeing the Netherlands in blue (hussars) and green (light dragoons) galloping wildly toward the crossroads and hearing them shouting in French, the Scots of the 92nd and 42nd Highland along the Namur road mistook them for French and were ordered to open fire on them. Many horses in particular were brought down, as they presented the largest targets ... van Merlen was left to reflect with sadness on the losses his unit had suffered and with bitterness that more had been caused by their 'Scotch' allies than by the French." - Flashbackhistory
I like this video because it plays things out at about the right pace to be able to understand what's happening. What I don't like about this video is that it's far more difficult to tell what's happening because it doesn't distinguish between infantry, cavalry and artillery and it has no labels to identify which units belong to which division or corps. It doesn't even distinguish the nationality of each unit in the allied army. A reall disapointment and missed opportunity.
It's amazing to think about 150,000 men in such a small piece of land. It would have been spectacular at the beginning and horrific at the end. Good video!
I always somehow underestimated the Battle of Waterloo until I saw a list of the many pages of British Army officers killed in the battle. Of the wounded officers there must have been many more and of NCO's and men, many, many thousands!
Interestingly, this only looks at the number of troops on each side but the most casualties were caused by cannon/artillery fire and Napoleon had 250 heavy cannon as 150 by Wellington (rounded up/down). Obviously this could not be shown in the graphics.
Well nah they ain’t gonna keep there troops to get mowed down on the shores, also Britian has fought multiple wars against an enemy with more allies an won.
The British had already negotiated with the French in 1814 to agree on a pact against Prussia. It has always been British policy to ally with anyone against the strongest power on the continent. Ultimately, it was precisely this British policy that turned a Hitler-inflicted conquest in the East against a Stalinist regime that was just as evil as the Nazis into a world war that then left the whole of Europe in ruins. This reminds me of the first Indiana Jones film and its ending: In the end, the bad guys find the hidden treasure, and in the end it was completely irrelevant what Indian Jones did beforehand, whether she had found him, whether he intervened or not . What I mean is that the outcome of the 2 WW had remained the same, an evil inhumane dictatorship would have won, even without the intervention of the Western Allies, right?
For those who don't know but is interested in battle, the British have the up side by having a the occupation of the hill with some defense in place since they role was not to defeat Napoleon but to hold as long as possible for the Prussian troops to arrive. Also Napoleon lost most of his veterans in the campaign of Russia so during this fight, it's was mostly young draft men against veteran for the British and Prussian side (or at least more experienced troops than what Napoleon had). And Finally even if Napoleon manage to win in Waterloo he was still in a though situation with Austrian, Russian and Swedish troops coming. Sure if Napoleon manage to win Waterloo he could raise 200k more troops (he manage to negotiate with the upperclass by giving some political power to them if they are willing to paid for the rise of a new army to fight against this coalition, and securing the rich land of Benelux was a proof that Napoleon could still win in an unwinnable situation.
You're right, but there was still an army ready in Prussia that would then have marched with the Russians to France. Blücher's troops only represented half of the entire Prussian army, and they were all fully trained. Napoleon's soldiers at Waterloo were sometimes so inexperienced that they didn't even know how to load their muskets...
Dans mon esprit tout divague, je me perds dans tes yeux Je me noie dans la vague de ton regard amoureux Je ne veux que ton âme divaguant sur ma peau Une fleur, une femme dans ton cœur Roméo Je ne suis que ton nom, le souffle lancinant De nos corps dans le sombre animés lentement
Interesting note, the video gives the impression that the British army is made up of 100% British, in fact, Wellington's army only had 30,000 British, the rest were Belgian, Dutch and South German troops In fact Watterloo is not an English victory but rather a Benelux and of course Prussian victory
By that definition ww2 is American victory not allied. British fought the entire battle with prussians coming at last minute. Also most German units in Wellingtons army were from hanover ,which was under British king.
@@vatsal7640A russian victory actually. If you go by army numbers everything the US fielded against Germany and Japan was just pocket change compared to the masses of bodies in the red army.
Honestly, the facts prove you wrong, Wellington has a famous reply ,the night or the Prussians, without the Prussians, the British were beaten As for WW2, looking at the facts, the sacrifices, the losses made to the German army, it was neither the English nor the Americans who defeated the German army, but Russia @@vatsal7640
Good point. It looks like it was that group of 6 French units, possibly the Old Guard, quite in the center at 7:08 on the main road that prevented the incirculation of a great part of the French army. Afterward they are themselves encircled and destroyed. I would like to learn more of that action.
Losses during the rout continued for several more days and the French suffered from desertion and units losing all cohesion. Prussian cavalry units almost captured Napoleon himself. His hat is still in Berlin.
It was a long, long day of marching and then the battle. The British Cavalry had been very hard hit, the Prussians had had a very long forced march. There was very little energy to pursue an enemy busy running away.
It was quite a relatively subdued advance by Wellington. There were thousands and thousands more men coming to join the british and prussians but this was Napoleons very last chance. Wellington didnt need to take any risks or lose lots of men in the chase
Because: A. Britain was leading said army. B. Britain made up the majority of the coalition army (made up of 5 factions). C. Britain basically financed the resistance against Napoleon.
I have seen it written many times recently that Blucher won the battle and not Wellington. But for much of the battle, Blucher wasn’t there and the French losses were twice and 3 times that of Wellington, despite having less troops. Blucher arriving meant they could push on for the outright victory but Wellington’s tactics were the key on the day.
Agreed... Wellington was holding the line decently enough, which was all he needed to do to win the day anyways. Napoleon was the one who had to race the clock.
No, Wellington could not survive without Blücher and was desperate until the arrival of Blücher. Blücher's troops are already diverting a mass of French troops (Lobau's corp) by 14:30, you see something like 1/2 of the reserve of regular troops (not counting the Imperial Guard) moving toward the East. They begin to fight the Prussians at 17:00. At 18:30, the French took la haie sainte and the other farm. Their guns are now firing in battery with a direct angle against the British. In this situation, the British are desperate and a defeat is certain. The Battle began at 11:00. It means that Wellington fought alone the French during only 3h30 before the Prussians began to divert French troops from him. This is not impressiv. 3,000 grenadiers out of 9000 the Imperial Guard had to fight the Prussians at Plancenoit ... Wellington himself admitted he was doomed and was saved only by Blücher. He arrived at the key moment just before the collapse of the British. Waterloo was a kind of miracle and not the result of a 180 IQ mastermind Wellington that calculated he could hold just enough time at Waterloo to receive Blücher's help before collapsing. It was a miracle. Anyway, during most of the battle, that's Ney that commanded the troops. All the cavalry charges on the left, the last assault of the Old Guard on the left instead of the right : Ney's order or Napoleon having to change his plans due to Ney's incompetence.
@@davidchardon1303 Several points on your observations. As I pointed out, during the 3.5 hours that you say were Wellington only, the French losses were considerably higher than than Wellingtons, despite Napoleon having considerably more men at his disposal. Wellington had met Blucher prior to the battle, so had factored in the arrival of additional troops. It took the French 7.5 hours to take La Haie Sainte and then only hold it for an hour and a half, this was a major strategic victory for Wellington. It was Napoleon who gave so much power to Ney, so it is no defence to say Ney lost the battle and not Napoleon. As I previously said, it is unfair to say Blucher won the battle because Wellington was in the field all day and as history now shows, his tactics were correct and won the day. It is also valid to say that Napoleon/Ney made many errors and they were decisive, but the majority of battles are won because of errors of judgment.
@@daviddavidk2352The casualities show in the video was not exactly, we do not know tge losses hour by hour but make sense Wellington had suffered less than Napoleon, most of the battles casualities comes from persuing the enemy so if the enemy has a strong possition and breaks probaly at the breaking moment the ine who attacked taken more casualities but a retreat may change it. About the battle, it was common by the time start a battle holding and waiting for allies to overcome the enemy when he is almost fully engaged, Napoleon himself was in similar positions many times, if the prussians didn't confirm their support Wellington would never faces Napoleon alone, even if he keeps Napoleon persuing him, he helps the Austrians and Russians to attack France in others places, as you say Napoleon was in a race against the clock. In Waterloo, Napoleon was already in all in and doomed.
@@alexandre2able agreed we don’t know precisely how the casualties fell, but we do know a timeframe on Hougoumont and Le Haye Sainte and also Neys cavalry charge and all of these actions were high losses for the French, and strategic victories for Wellington and his tactics. Wellington made Napoleon risk men by the way he set up his army, including having them positioned behind the brow of the hill to negate Napoleon’s significantly superior cannon strength. All these factors were due to Wellington and not Blucher, so it is not correct to say Wellington did not win Waterloo, as it was his tactics throughout the day that forced Napoleon to gamble and ultimately lose.
For all the discourse around this battle and who 'really' won, what this one really drives home for me is that Hougomont and La Haye Sainte made the battle. Wellington wasn't going to win purely by holding Hougomont, but he would have lost if he hadn't held it, and not just held the farm itself but also keeping open the routes of supply and reinforcement to keep it fighting. Conversely, Wellington almost lost by not keeping La Haye Sainte sufficiently supplied and reinforced. That aside, the parallels are crazy here. Napoleon is certainly not at his best in this battle, and neither is Ney. His army as well, isn't at its peak. But neither is Wellington at his best. He doesn't have as much time to prep his defensive ground as he previously had at Talavera or Salamanca (although he had done a survey during the peace), and neither does Napoleon take the time to really prepare. Wellington doesn't have the same kind of army he had in Spain, the one he built from the ground up over years of campaigning, and neither does Napoleon. Ney has PTSD, but so does Picton on the other side. Jerome Bonaparte makes idiotic decisions during the assault on Hougonmont, and on the other side the Prince of Orange's blunders lead to huge losses around La Haye Sainte. The Union Brigade charges too far and suffers huge losses around the guns, while Ney's cavalry charge is ultimately a waste of time. Ultimately, we're never going to know what might have happened if Wellington and Napoleon had fought each other at the height of their respective military strength and ability. I'd say that both were dealt a very mixed hand in this battle and played it as best they could.
And we will never know whether Napoleon would have held out against the entire Prussian army in Ligny. Only 3 of 4 Prussian corps were involved in the fight, and only against the Prussians did Napoleon feel compelled to do what he had always tried to avoid, namely sending his Old Guard directly into battle in order to force another victory ! This was the case in Ligny, and two days later on the battlefield of Waterloo in Plancenoit. (On the Wellington front line, the Old Guard only stood as a reserve behind the attacking Middle Guard ;-) )
Tbf I wouldn't compare modern frontlines to pre-industrial strategic warfare. I understand what you're going for though, and gotta somewhat agree. Another thing you might wanna note is that the video here, which I like, doesn't perfectly represent the situation at Waterloo. After the Old Guard was forced back (around 21:00 hours, or 6:35 in the video) the French army went into a full route south to the French border. It was only the stand and destruction of the Old Guard that saved the rest of the French army from complete annihilation; although it promptly disintegrated after the battle as soldiers fled in all directions and did not return to their officers. So, although his army wasn't *completely* encircled and captured, Waterloo was still a disaster as Napoleon's only field army left was destroyed.
no he’s a defensive military strategist so mostly he commands his force defensively. would of been stupid to even be in the offensive side when your on the most perfect defensive terrain
Cool, but have you seen "Battle of Waterloo using Google Street View"? It's the one where the little bulletproof car drives between the lines as the battle is still going on. You should check it out.
It's an interesting way of presenting the battle, but if possible, would've been better with icons to represent Cavalry, Artillery, Infantry, and maybe something to indicate terrain height.
I like how one of the most memorable battles in history, took place in the Netherlands, yet they get barely any recognition (which is makes sense but its still funny)
Impressive combination of video and music. I enjoyed watching a video of this characteristics. Just in my opinion, a scale legend would improve the video to perfection.
I wish Google Maps or Earth would implement an option to see the terrain at different times, seeing those streets, stores and stores in the middle of a battle in addition to the lands already parceled out seems surreal to me. 😅
France lost its empire neither at Waterloo nor at Leipzig and not even during the capture of Paris, it happened when the French crossed the Neman River
What is interesting to me is that history seems to suggest stalemates regardless of tactics, training and skill when the body of men for both sides starts with more than 60k. These seems true in American Civil War encounters, WWI, and many others. The battle devolves into a slaughterhouse with no well defined victor and perhaps a loss for future battles of the resource strapped army.
It was an group effort from british, German, Dutch and Belgian troops but all commanded by the British it’s a lot easier to just use the British flag then using their own nations flags because there were a lot
You can say that more about the Germans on the British side, but it’s because there were a lot of different nations involved but all were under British command so to make life easier it’s just the British flag
This version of the battle of Waterloo is incomplete. It lacks the considerable Netherlands contribution (about 18.500 troops, commanded by the Prince of Orange, later King Willem II) to the allied effort.
Wellington's Army was a mixed bag of British, Belgian, Dutch, and German troops. Would be better if the flags are made to match but I understand it would be a tall order to locate all of them in the battle lines.
@@HerrLBrodersenYep definitely the largest, it’s was 50% German, including KGL then 30% British and 20% Dutch and Belgian these percents were just for infantry, cavalry was 50% British and 25% German and 25 Dutch and Belgian
But that can't be right. I was just reading on Quora about how the Americans saved the British at Waterloo and about how we should be eternally grateful for it!
The Prussians arriving was part of the pre-arranged plan. If there was a strong possibility of them not getting there, there wouldn't have been a battle in the first place.
He achieved his strategic goal... not sure how else one could define victory. Sure, he didn't crush the French army 1v1 but that was never his aim or the aims of the coalition at large. Besides he was outmanned, and notably outgunned. He had available many fewer cannon, which was always a problem.
And the english still think Wellington won this battle ? At 16:00, the english army is collapsing. "Give me night or give me Blücher" said Wellington, it clearly means they were in big troubles
@@CptBritish the english were collapsing, the retreat was near to be ordered, but they received a messenger from Blücher. At 16:00, the english army was defeated.
@@durandil Defeated is a strong word. That French attack retreated twice and still reformed. Not saying all was fine and dandy but it clearly wasn't defeated.
@@CptBritish when an army prepare to retreat, they are defeated. They are saved by the prussians. If they arrived half an hour later, the english would have retreated to Bruxelles and all the french army would have face the prussians
Wellington never intended to fight the French on his own. He was in trouble because Blucher was delayed; without the flanking attack he would've had to retreat, but the Prussian army arrived according to plan and the battle was over for Napoleon.
Napoleon was forced to attack, even if the position on the field was terrible (uphill), but he had to because he was slightly superior in number of soldiers, Wellington rightly waited for Blücher.
All those British flags.The force that Wellington commanded consisted of Dutch,Belgians and Germanic States.There were more Germans fighting under Wellington than British,particularly the Kings (German) legion.Germany would not become a nation until 1871.Of course Wellington was Bailed out by the Prussians,without which Wellington would of LOST the battle of Waterloo.
Yes but WELLINGTON commanded them. The flags are used to show the tactics. This is what this whole video is about. Not how some random soldiers from different countries fought.
Fun, but not very accurate. Especially the end. To name a few: The guard was repelled in part by the coming up of Chassé with his fresh Dutch troops, slamming into the guard's flanks. Plus, the Allied forces on the front were completely decimated by that time. But the biggest issue: Only about +/- 33% of the allies troops were British. Especially the Dutch are missing here ( The Hanover Troop were fighting under the British flag, even though they were German) So your flags are wrong. Very frustrating that even after +200 years the British propaganda of the time managed to rewrite history even though the true facts are common knowledge now ( well outside the Anglo nations at least). Let's hope we don't get the same with Ridley Scott's version of Napoleon! :)
You're right. 😎 There were only 26-27,000 British soldiers involved, + 5,000 Germans from the Kings German Legion, the rest were Dutch, Hanoverians, Braunschweigers and Nassauers. I also can't understand the hype about Wellington at all. In my opinion he failed two days before Waterloo because he wasted time before responding to the Prussians' warning and finally sending troops to Quatre Bras, whereby a Dutch officer was already organizing the defense independently, and at Waterloo he didn't do more than anyone else in his Position had done. Any other general with a bit of combat experience would have done the same thing, namely choosing and using a good defensive position. Nothing that makes you have to burst out in big cheers just because someone does something obvious. And Wellington made no more than hold a good defensive position to withstand an opponent of roughly equal strength until the Prussians appeared and brought victory...
@@raka522 Napoleon had allies fighting for him too at times, did he not?now I think about it, so did Hannibal and most of the roman emperors. With a bit of thought I could recall a number of other famous generals too. Pretty sure Alexander's army wasn't just Macedonians. Persians too.
@@DanBeech-ht7sw Napoleon had allies who fought for him? Can it really be considered an ally when Napoleon conquers a country, rearranges the borders a little, appoints a close relative or his own general as ruler there? Or if you occupy a country and force its ruler to pay reparations that include soldiers for him? These were all allies who were either forced into it or dependent on him. The only people who really voluntarily fought with and for Napoleon were the Poles, but Poland no longer existed at that point and they only did it because Napoleon promised them that he would make sure they could form their own state again, which however, this was not the case after Napoleon's defeat.
When I saw the title of the video, I was intrigued. I am a student of the battle of Waterloo. I have flown over the battlefield and walked parts of the battlefield and was hoping that this video would add to my knowledge. It failed completely. 1 Having a minute by minute casualty counter for the opposing forces is sheer fantasy. Nobody at the time could have estimated this. 2 Even having a thorough knowledge of the topography of the battlefield and the phases of the battle, I found it hard to make sense of the movements of the tiny flags on the map. Some advice: 1 Name the key features of the opposing positions on the battlefield. Particularly Hougomont, La Haye Sainte and Plancenoit 2 Distinguish between the phases of the battle. Your video does not enable a viewer to distinguish between an attack of cavalry vs an attack by infantry. 3 Ditch the casualty counter. Not because it is a guess but because it really has no value in gauging the progress of the battle. I'm disappointed.
very nice but it would have been better if allied troops were depicted with their own flags (dutch, belgian, german etc troops) and single units were divided into artillery, cavalry and infantry.
There were no belgian troops there lol country didnt even exist at the time dude. It would later break away with the help of the same french you see here. The flemish traitors of their own country(united netherlands) would become secondrate citizens in this belgian "nation"under frenchspeaking overlords until the constitutional changes of the 1960s...
After the Battle of Ligny, the Prussian army was still around 95,000 men, who made their way to Wavre in heavy rain. The soldiers slept there for a few hours and then marched straight on to Waterloo over completely waterlogged paths. Since Blücher recognized the danger to Wellington, the Prussians immediately intervened in the fighting without waiting for the entire army to be complete. Because more and more Prussians appeared on the battlefield over time, their number continued to increase instead of decreasing.
![True Size of Napoleon's Army - The Infantry [c. 1808] 3D DOCUMENTARY](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qR0sODDUT8U/mqdefault.jpg)
![True Size of Napoleon's Army - The Infantry [c. 1808] 3D DOCUMENTARY](/img/tr.png)
I think 19th century Generals would have KILLED to get such a battelfield overview. Today we ask "Why didn't he exploit this gap or that open flank?", but back then the flow of information was just so slow and unreliable. Most units just spend the most time waiting for orders like that block of french soldiers in the rear that did not move for 9 hours.
That block of French soldiers are the reserve units including The French old guards.Napoleon sent them on at the end of the battle
@@caisam6621No tendría que haberlos movilizado antes?
Why the question of the deadliest weapon to take back in history is simple. Take a history book back in time.
The fog of war still exists today.
@@tomhath8413that is true, though to a much smaller extent, especially if a major war was to break out.
At that point both sides have their agents, satellites, drones, recon etc which removes most the issues. You can see it in Ukraine to an extent.
It all went downhill for Napoleon as soon as the Prussians occupied Saule's chip shop.
that chip shop must have been important
@@MoonLanding1969that chip shop was the only thing supplying Napoleon, once he lost it, it was all over.
@@Akkise Damn never knew a chip shop could be a important
No cod! Disastrous!
Well of course 😮
I can't believe there were around 160k soldiers on the ground. The carnage was horrific. And the final French stand to annihilation. Very brave.
well i think the most brave moment, was charge of french cavalry lead by Ney (it was here we lost battle because of the error of ney to charge without support of gun and infantry) but well if we talk of couradge it was here. 5k to 6k horseman, heavy and light cavalry, cuirrasiers, charging without fear english square formation. and they were close to succeed to break in at first assault, they went away and reformed and went in again, in fact they did that several time, the best visual representation of that was in the film waterloo of the director Bondartchouk
that movie : ruclips.net/video/Q5XfCgDiJcE/видео.html
They were given the chance to surrender. They refused.
Actually they did surrender @@cdeford2
@@adamneville8291Not according to any account I've read. And I've read many.
This is more exciting than Ridley Scott's version
😂😂😂true
You think you're so great because you have BOATS!!!!
Ridley Scott's film is such a joke!
@@onlynameMrBlank Say what you want about that film, but that quote was hilarious.
Anything is.
Wellington chose a battlefield to his advantage, Napoleon was sick, ney got target fixation and blücher was as usual much faster than anyone thought
Not to mention Davout was busy being Lord Minister of War...
That was really interesting way of getting an overview of a very historical battle , well done
It would have looked more interesting to be able to tell cavalry from infantry, especially when the British & Netherlands troops formed squares & the French cavalry rode around them more than once to no great effect.
ney thought the brits were retreating
The Prussian Forces under Blucher were the main forces that defeated Napoleon. The battle took place not near Waterloo but 4.5km away . After the war British propaganda under Wellington promoted it as a primarily British victory. Diorama's created after the event actually removed the Prussians to show it as a primarily British victory.
So I'd say this is false history.
@@williamzk9083That has nothing to do with what is being said above.
@@williamzk9083They got their arses handed to them by the french one day earlier. Nothing to be proud of .
@@allistaircampbell9282 bitter little frenchman lol. Wellington was a hero for absolutely destroying the French in Spain long before he slapped Nappy in the face at waterloo.
Britain was France's nemesis, Napoleon could have had peace a few times if it wasnt for our determination to keep making war on him. :)
Spent five years maintaining the AV kit illuminating the wonderful Sibourne Model of Waterloo at the National Army Museum, London. That thing was truly epic in itself and the new narrative was excellent, but nothing can display the ebb and flow of the battle like this. A masterpiece!
I've seen that model. It's spectacular. And very well maintained.
Sibourne was wrong.
@@MrGieltedze Look at the genius!
The Sibourne Diorama is no longer as it was originally created, is it?
Wellington himself ensured that most of the Prussian troops were removed from it in order to make his own victory more glorious...
@@MrGieltedze Yes and no.
The original Sibourne model was very carefully researched, but was never allowed to be publicly displayed in the UK. He simply showed too many Prussian troops on the battlefield, and Wellington personally intervened and corrected this in his favor and had most of them removed so that it later corresponded to his story - the Prussians would only have appeared when Wellington had practically won the battle alone, and then only with very little Prussian support. Of course, the British are very happy to believe this story and spread it as such.
Prussians are never late, they arrive precisely when they need to
A new presentation of the battle I had not previously encountered - the movement makes so much more sense of all of those static plans one usually sees - I found myself on the edge of my seat waiting for "Le garde recule!" - Well done, thank you for your work creating this.
it was quite interesting to see the real distance that la garde had to face, before reaching wellington's position. after their attack fails, the rest is history.
According to Google Earth the distance they had to march was roughly 2200 meters, which according to the video took them 30 mins. This yields a marching speed of about 4.4 km/h (normal walking speed), however they had to walk up an incline and in formation, while being battered by enemy artillery.
@@hulk0hulk that´s not bad, given that they had a load of gear to haul & had to face a scary cannonade!
picketts charge only went about a mile, but the guns were much more precise 50 years later.
Tout dépend de la position que tu choisis pour parler de "départ". La garde fit, semble-t'il un arrêt un peu au sud-ouest de la ferme de la Haye-Sainte poir se former en carré pour monter au contact des lignes anglo-alliées. Qu'appelles-tu "wellington's position" ? The first line of fire or the all army stand or the place where the Duke was at that moment of the battle ?...
The battle was decided by the Prussian arrival of 40k soldiers. Till then, the casualty ratio was constant, and a draw at that
I can't wait until we can implement Google Maps with Augmented Reality so we can visit the physical locations and watch a full battle take place like we were actually there.
You can easily get killed while walking the battlefield. There are roads where cars are traveling very fast and cannot see pedestrians. VR might save a life!
Can you imagine you are in that last 1900 soldier unit left in the battlefield 😬
They were just afk
Lol
no, they are the old guards. Cover fire for the army to retreat. So they couldnt get out.
It's the old guard's disasterous rearguard action. If you watch waterloo movie you'd know their fate.
@@HochundDeutschyapster ya i thought that it was something like that i was just joking ofc respect to the fallen ones who sacrifieced them selfs to help others retreat to safety
Blücher played a decisive role in the victory at Waterloo. It was Blücher who struck Napoleon in the rear. In addition, Blucher had an army of more than 50 thousand. In general, the Allies at Waterloo had a twofold superiority over Napoleon. But the decisive thing was that Napoleon had no reserves. For example, Napoleon lost the battle of Aspern-Essling in May 1809, but thanks to his reserves he won the next battle and the entire company. At Waterloo, Napoleon had limited resources. In addition, Napoleon lost all the veterans, that is, the “best of the best,” in 1812. and this is a bit of a “half-million-strong army,” which was not enough for Napoleon to remain in the statue of Emperor of Europe.
I am afraid my friend you may have been misguided, the prussians only had a fraction of their initial numbers as napoleon had already dealt with them the previous week. The french stood as the largest single army at that particular moment.
@@charleythom8031 What battle are we talking about, the Battle of Ligny? There Blucher had over 90 thousand soldiers, of whom he lost about 16-20 thousand. Open any article about Waterloo, there is a specific figure: 50 thousand soldiers for Blucher and 68 thousand soldiers for Wellington, versus 72-73 thousand for Napoleon. 118-120 thousand allies against 73 thousand French. In addition, a huge army of Austrians and Russians was coming from the east, Napoleon was initially doomed to a second abdication of power. The decisive events that led to the end of Napoleon happened in Russia in 1812 and in the largest battle in history at Leipzig in 1813, and at Waterloo the allies finished off a lion whose claws and fangs had already been torn out.
I think Wellington fought for time, and he did so successfully against a larger (not by much, in truth) army. He was successful in this regard, in that he achieved his strategic goals, where lesser commanders could have failed as they regularly had done in the past.
@@ОлексійБойко-з5г The Prussians lost 16,000 men in Ligny, but the French also lost 12,000 men, and Napoleon was even forced to use his old guard there to force victory.
Deducting these losses and the deserters from the Rhineland contingents, formerly allies of Napoleon, around 95,000 Prussian soldiers still arrived in Wavre.
Of these, 14,000 soldiers stayed there under Gerneral Thielmann to involve Grouchy and his 33,000 Frenchmen in fighting and keep them away from the battlefield in Waterloo, the remaining 80,000 men marched to Waterloo.
By the end of the battle, around 50,000 Prussians had taken part in the fighting, while 30,000 men were still on the march there.
The Prussians had more artillery than Napoleon, and more and far better cavalry than the French, and their ammunition supplies were still full when they appeared on the battlefield, while the French's were almost exhausted.
Incidentally, only about half of the entire Prussian army was gathered there under Blücher, because the other half was still in Prussia ready to march on France together with the Russians and Austrians.
Napoleon also had over 100 pieces of artillery more than Wellington's army ... personally I have always been of the opinion that Napoleon was overrated ... he through numbers at battles ... God is on the side of the big battalions as Voltaire said ... he had superiority in guns ... he did not value the life of his men ... he lost 500k men in the east
You should've included the flags of all units from the Dutch, Hannoverian and other German states armies. About half of Wellington's Anglo-allied army wasn't British. This fact is often overlooked in representations of the battle.
yes, in fact "the greatest military victory in British history" is in reality not a British victory at all, 3/4 of Wellington's army was made up of Germans and Dutch. And without the arrival of the Prussians, Wellington would surely fall back. Anyway, history has proven that the Anglo-Saxons were masters in the art of rewriting history for propaganda purposes. A bit like the famous Americans who liberated Europe, when in reality the Soviets had already defeated the German army before a single American set foot in Europe.
@@leznipe1164 the sacrifice of the Soviet people has been immeasurable and they've played a mayor part in defeating the Germans. But Soviet propaganda also likes to forget that without US lend lease aid they probably wouldn't have made it. We all like to be the hero but the large scale conflicts like WW2 and the Napoleonic wars weren't won by the efforts of one single nation. While national histories often focus on their part of a conflict, we should try to see the bigger picture. This isn't a problem of "Anglo-Saxons" alone.
Anyone with a lick of understanding knows that, but womp womp I guess
Would take *a lot* of research to show where those units were, interspersed as they were in Wellington's line. And arguments from some historians about placement would ensue.
It's more for clarity.
speaking of uniforms and the allies:
"There then occurred one of those tragic incidents of war in which men die in error at the hands of friends. Seeing the Netherlands in blue (hussars) and green (light dragoons) galloping wildly toward the crossroads and hearing them shouting in French, the Scots of the 92nd and 42nd Highland along the Namur road mistook them for French and were ordered to open fire on them. Many horses in particular were brought down, as they presented the largest targets ... van Merlen was left to reflect with sadness on the losses his unit had suffered and with bitterness that more had been caused by their 'Scotch' allies than by the French."
- Flashbackhistory
Interesting way of portraying the battle. The timestamps with the exact amount of casualties and locations of units are pure speculation of course.
I like this video because it plays things out at about the right pace to be able to understand what's happening. What I don't like about this video is that it's far more difficult to tell what's happening because it doesn't distinguish between infantry, cavalry and artillery and it has no labels to identify which units belong to which division or corps. It doesn't even distinguish the nationality of each unit in the allied army. A reall disapointment and missed opportunity.
It's amazing to think about 150,000 men in such a small piece of land. It would have been spectacular at the beginning and horrific at the end. Good video!
Just about the same number of combatants, at Cannae! And a very much smaller field of battle.
I like the background sound using the Barber of Seville overture, it's in the same era as the battle, The barber was composed at 1816
I always somehow underestimated the Battle of Waterloo until I saw a list of the many pages of British Army officers killed in the battle. Of the wounded officers there must have been many more and of NCO's and men, many, many thousands!
I saw it too, but can't remember where. Do you have that source??
Does anyone know wicht french regiments are standing in the end? (7:38)
Elite old guard
Interestingly, this only looks at the number of troops on each side but the most casualties were caused by cannon/artillery fire and Napoleon had 250 heavy cannon as 150 by Wellington (rounded up/down). Obviously this could not be shown in the graphics.
I think they could have used the standard symbols on the flags to at least show infantry, cavalry and artillery.
Especially since its confusing if you dont realise that 1:58 is a mass calvalry charge
Therefore, the British casualty figures during the battle lie, since the video was created by the Anglo-Saxons
Lead by Ney
You Can Kinda See How Napoleon Was Close to Beating Wellington During This, Only For Him To Lose Because Of Blucher And The Prussian Arrival
Hence Wellington saying that it was a near run thing. The Prussians arrived in time - as he was hoping.
Tactics of Britain:
-Be on the side with more allies
-Hide on island as the mainland starts to fall
-Overpower the enemy with sheer numbers
-Win
Well nah they ain’t gonna keep there troops to get mowed down on the shores, also Britian has fought multiple wars against an enemy with more allies an won.
100 years later it was UK and France v Germany
The British had already negotiated with the French in 1814 to agree on a pact against Prussia.
It has always been British policy to ally with anyone against the strongest power on the continent.
Ultimately, it was precisely this British policy that turned a Hitler-inflicted conquest in the East against a Stalinist regime that was just as evil as the Nazis into a world war that then left the whole of Europe in ruins.
This reminds me of the first Indiana Jones film and its ending: In the end, the bad guys find the hidden treasure, and in the end it was completely irrelevant what Indian Jones did beforehand, whether she had found him, whether he intervened or not .
What I mean is that the outcome of the 2 WW had remained the same, an evil inhumane dictatorship would have won, even without the intervention of the Western Allies, right?
@@raka522I don' think this is something special for british every country would have side up against someone more stronger
For those who don't know but is interested in battle, the British have the up side by having a the occupation of the hill with some defense in place since they role was not to defeat Napoleon but to hold as long as possible for the Prussian troops to arrive.
Also Napoleon lost most of his veterans in the campaign of Russia so during this fight, it's was mostly young draft men against veteran for the British and Prussian side (or at least more experienced troops than what Napoleon had).
And Finally even if Napoleon manage to win in Waterloo he was still in a though situation with Austrian, Russian and Swedish troops coming.
Sure if Napoleon manage to win Waterloo he could raise 200k more troops (he manage to negotiate with the upperclass by giving some political power to them if they are willing to paid for the rise of a new army to fight against this coalition, and securing the rich land of Benelux was a proof that Napoleon could still win in an unwinnable situation.
You're right, but there was still an army ready in Prussia that would then have marched with the Russians to France. Blücher's troops only represented half of the entire Prussian army, and they were all fully trained.
Napoleon's soldiers at Waterloo were sometimes so inexperienced that they didn't even know how to load their muskets...
Then, he realised there is nothing he can do.
Dans mon esprit tout divague, je me perds dans tes yeux Je me noie dans la vague de ton regard amoureux Je ne veux que ton âme divaguant sur ma peau Une fleur, une femme dans ton cœur Roméo Je ne suis que ton nom, le souffle lancinant De nos corps dans le sombre animés lentement
Interesting note, the video gives the impression that the British army is made up of 100% British, in fact, Wellington's army only had 30,000 British, the rest were Belgian, Dutch and South German troops
In fact Watterloo is not an English victory but rather a Benelux and of course Prussian victory
By that definition ww2 is American victory not allied.
British fought the entire battle with prussians coming at last minute.
Also most German units in Wellingtons army were from hanover ,which was under British king.
@@vatsal7640 lets pour ourselves a cup of truth. Without Prussians, British would be defeated there.
@@vatsal7640A russian victory actually. If you go by army numbers everything the US fielded against Germany and Japan was just pocket change compared to the masses of bodies in the red army.
Honestly, the facts prove you wrong, Wellington has a famous reply ,the night or the Prussians, without the Prussians, the British were beaten
As for WW2, looking at the facts, the sacrifices, the losses made to the German army, it was neither the English nor the Americans who defeated the German army, but Russia
@@vatsal7640
United Kingdom: 31,000 (25,000 British and 6,000 King's German Legion)
• Netherlands: 17,000
• Hanover: 11,000
• Brunswick: 6,000
• Nassau: 3,000
• 156 guns
Blücher's army:
• Prussians: 50,000
So yes, only 25 000 english troops
Were there really so few casualties during the rout? That's one of the most orderly retreat ever done then.
Good point. It looks like it was that group of 6 French units, possibly the Old Guard, quite in the center at 7:08 on the main road that prevented the incirculation of a great part of the French army. Afterward they are themselves encircled and destroyed. I would like to learn more of that action.
@@ThePerfectRed Encirclement
Losses during the rout continued for several more days and the French suffered from desertion and units losing all cohesion. Prussian cavalry units almost captured Napoleon himself. His hat is still in Berlin.
It was a long, long day of marching and then the battle. The British Cavalry had been very hard hit, the Prussians had had a very long forced march. There was very little energy to pursue an enemy busy running away.
It was quite a relatively subdued advance by Wellington. There were thousands and thousands more men coming to join the british and prussians but this was Napoleons very last chance. Wellington didnt need to take any risks or lose lots of men in the chase
This would be a great way to show other battles e.g. Falaise pocket, Kiev encirclements, Rzhev grinder battles, Battle of the Bulge.. Nice work!
Battle for Berlin)
Really impressive work, both the graphics and the numbers!
Why are there at te start only French and UK flags? The Brits were less then half of the allied army!
Because:
A. Britain was leading said army.
B. Britain made up the majority of the coalition army (made up of 5 factions).
C. Britain basically financed the resistance against Napoleon.
75% of the British forces were Dutch/German
I have seen it written many times recently that Blucher won the battle and not Wellington. But for much of the battle, Blucher wasn’t there and the French losses were twice and 3 times that of Wellington, despite having less troops. Blucher arriving meant they could push on for the outright victory but Wellington’s tactics were the key on the day.
Agreed... Wellington was holding the line decently enough, which was all he needed to do to win the day anyways. Napoleon was the one who had to race the clock.
No, Wellington could not survive without Blücher and was desperate until the arrival of Blücher. Blücher's troops are already diverting a mass of French troops (Lobau's corp) by 14:30, you see something like 1/2 of the reserve of regular troops (not counting the Imperial Guard) moving toward the East. They begin to fight the Prussians at 17:00. At 18:30, the French took la haie sainte and the other farm. Their guns are now firing in battery with a direct angle against the British. In this situation, the British are desperate and a defeat is certain.
The Battle began at 11:00. It means that Wellington fought alone the French during only 3h30 before the Prussians began to divert French troops from him. This is not impressiv. 3,000 grenadiers out of 9000 the Imperial Guard had to fight the Prussians at Plancenoit ...
Wellington himself admitted he was doomed and was saved only by Blücher. He arrived at the key moment just before the collapse of the British. Waterloo was a kind of miracle and not the result of a 180 IQ mastermind Wellington that calculated he could hold just enough time at Waterloo to receive Blücher's help before collapsing. It was a miracle.
Anyway, during most of the battle, that's Ney that commanded the troops. All the cavalry charges on the left, the last assault of the Old Guard on the left instead of the right : Ney's order or Napoleon having to change his plans due to Ney's incompetence.
@@davidchardon1303 Several points on your observations. As I pointed out, during the 3.5 hours that you say were Wellington only, the French losses were considerably higher than than Wellingtons, despite Napoleon having considerably more men at his disposal. Wellington had met Blucher prior to the battle, so had factored in the arrival of additional troops. It took the French 7.5 hours to take La Haie Sainte and then only hold it for an hour and a half, this was a major strategic victory for Wellington. It was Napoleon who gave so much power to Ney, so it is no defence to say Ney lost the battle and not Napoleon. As I previously said, it is unfair to say Blucher won the battle because Wellington was in the field all day and as history now shows, his tactics were correct and won the day. It is also valid to say that Napoleon/Ney made many errors and they were decisive, but the majority of battles are won because of errors of judgment.
@@daviddavidk2352The casualities show in the video was not exactly, we do not know tge losses hour by hour but make sense Wellington had suffered less than Napoleon, most of the battles casualities comes from persuing the enemy so if the enemy has a strong possition and breaks probaly at the breaking moment the ine who attacked taken more casualities but a retreat may change it. About the battle, it was common by the time start a battle holding and waiting for allies to overcome the enemy when he is almost fully engaged, Napoleon himself was in similar positions many times, if the prussians didn't confirm their support Wellington would never faces Napoleon alone, even if he keeps Napoleon persuing him, he helps the Austrians and Russians to attack France in others places, as you say Napoleon was in a race against the clock.
In Waterloo, Napoleon was already in all in and doomed.
@@alexandre2able agreed we don’t know precisely how the casualties fell, but we do know a timeframe on Hougoumont and Le Haye Sainte and also Neys cavalry charge and all of these actions were high losses for the French, and strategic victories for Wellington and his tactics. Wellington made Napoleon risk men by the way he set up his army, including having them positioned behind the brow of the hill to negate Napoleon’s significantly superior cannon strength. All these factors were due to Wellington and not Blucher, so it is not correct to say Wellington did not win Waterloo, as it was his tactics throughout the day that forced Napoleon to gamble and ultimately lose.
For all the discourse around this battle and who 'really' won, what this one really drives home for me is that Hougomont and La Haye Sainte made the battle. Wellington wasn't going to win purely by holding Hougomont, but he would have lost if he hadn't held it, and not just held the farm itself but also keeping open the routes of supply and reinforcement to keep it fighting. Conversely, Wellington almost lost by not keeping La Haye Sainte sufficiently supplied and reinforced.
That aside, the parallels are crazy here. Napoleon is certainly not at his best in this battle, and neither is Ney. His army as well, isn't at its peak. But neither is Wellington at his best. He doesn't have as much time to prep his defensive ground as he previously had at Talavera or Salamanca (although he had done a survey during the peace), and neither does Napoleon take the time to really prepare. Wellington doesn't have the same kind of army he had in Spain, the one he built from the ground up over years of campaigning, and neither does Napoleon. Ney has PTSD, but so does Picton on the other side. Jerome Bonaparte makes idiotic decisions during the assault on Hougonmont, and on the other side the Prince of Orange's blunders lead to huge losses around La Haye Sainte. The Union Brigade charges too far and suffers huge losses around the guns, while Ney's cavalry charge is ultimately a waste of time.
Ultimately, we're never going to know what might have happened if Wellington and Napoleon had fought each other at the height of their respective military strength and ability. I'd say that both were dealt a very mixed hand in this battle and played it as best they could.
And we will never know whether Napoleon would have held out against the entire Prussian army in Ligny.
Only 3 of 4 Prussian corps were involved in the fight, and only against the Prussians did Napoleon feel compelled to do what he had always tried to avoid, namely sending his Old Guard directly into battle in order to force another victory !
This was the case in Ligny, and two days later on the battlefield of Waterloo in Plancenoit.
(On the Wellington front line, the Old Guard only stood as a reserve behind the attacking Middle Guard ;-) )
Thnx, this was a very welcome addition to my Waterloo battle addiction ❤
Reminds me of the Falaise pocket. Looks like Napoleon managed to avoid a disaster in this case.
Tbf I wouldn't compare modern frontlines to pre-industrial strategic warfare. I understand what you're going for though, and gotta somewhat agree.
Another thing you might wanna note is that the video here, which I like, doesn't perfectly represent the situation at Waterloo. After the Old Guard was forced back (around 21:00 hours, or 6:35 in the video) the French army went into a full route south to the French border. It was only the stand and destruction of the Old Guard that saved the rest of the French army from complete annihilation; although it promptly disintegrated after the battle as soldiers fled in all directions and did not return to their officers. So, although his army wasn't *completely* encircled and captured, Waterloo was still a disaster as Napoleon's only field army left was destroyed.
He didn't, his army dissolved during the pursuit.
Wellington was a camper ☹️☹️
Wellington is another Montgomery😅
@@jianjiang6293 Oww what's the matter still mad at Britain?
Yes@@ChrisCrossClash
no he’s a defensive military strategist so mostly he commands his force defensively. would of been stupid to even be in the offensive side when your on the most perfect defensive terrain
@@Princeton5 yes, I know, you are right, but history loves the more agressive generals i think…..
"There's nothing we can do." 💀
Cool, but have you seen "Battle of Waterloo using Google Street View"? It's the one where the little bulletproof car drives between the lines as the battle is still going on. You should check it out.
*Imagine seeing Napoleon Bonaparte on Street View*
-Hey guys we're getting surrounded should we retreat?
-Nah we fine
It's an interesting way of presenting the battle, but if possible, would've been better with icons to represent Cavalry, Artillery, Infantry, and maybe something to indicate terrain height.
there is a American Civil War series like you describe, it's fantastic
I liked the part where Blücher said “It’s Blüchering time” then blüchered all over the place
Truly one of the battles of all time
Wow, even in defeat, Napoleon still got a near K/D of 1:1
"The only thing worse than a Victory is a defeat"
Duke of Wellington Journal entry after Waterloo
This was used at the end of the 1970 Waterloo Movie
Napoleon: ha ha we are kinda winni- wait why do I hear Prussian music?
Not kinda, napolean was winning Waterloo and it wasn't even close. He just delayed the final blow and lost the entire battle
I like how one of the most memorable battles in history, took place in the Netherlands, yet they get barely any recognition (which is makes sense but its still funny)
Grouchy! Where is Grouchy?
The same place as Steiner and his counter attack
I need those men!!!
4:27 the british had 69,420 troops
5:14 the french troops had 69,420 troops
9 year old humor
69,421* for british. There's not enough frames to capture every number
Also 7:41 was 42068 cutting really close again
@@MasterCalensk who cares
🤖
WHERE IS GROUCHY?
Impressive combination of video and music. I enjoyed watching a video of this characteristics. Just in my opinion, a scale legend would improve the video to perfection.
I wish Google Maps or Earth would implement an option to see the terrain at different times, seeing those streets, stores and stores in the middle of a battle in addition to the lands already parceled out seems surreal to me. 😅
I feel like it would be hard for google to go back in time to 1815 to take some pictures
The streets were probably not that different to be honest
French weren't fighting the British they were in them💀
France lost its empire neither at Waterloo nor at Leipzig and not even during the capture of Paris, it happened when the French crossed the Neman River
Do the flags represent regiments?
No, the British infantry side was 50% German which includes KGL regiments and German states 30% British and 20% Dutch and Belgian
How about Austerlitz for something different?
Where do you find maps for the different battles
Can you do Operation Compass WW2?
Something doesn’t seem right, from 21.700 casualties on the coalition side there is no single casualty anymore, quite admirable.
i wish this map showed where arty was mostly focused since it was such a huge part of the Napoleonic wars
7:47 Which french regiments were those remaining?? were they all killed?
it's the old guard and yes they preferred to die than to surrender
*La garde meurt mais ne se rend pas !*
It's the old guard and contrary to popular belief, they weren't massacred, they surrendered.
@@roguefrantzy6583except they didn't die. And they didn't get to retreat, and they certainly didn't win.
@@mwittmann68Sauf qu'ils se sont rendus
What is interesting to me is that history seems to suggest stalemates regardless of tactics, training and skill when the body of men for both sides starts with more than 60k. These seems true in American Civil War encounters, WWI, and many others. The battle devolves into a slaughterhouse with no well defined victor and perhaps a loss for future battles of the resource strapped army.
Estimated 20,000 Dutch troops and no flag?
Dutch people betrayed France and are cowards
It was an group effort from british, German, Dutch and Belgian troops but all commanded by the British it’s a lot easier to just use the British flag then using their own nations flags because there were a lot
Why don't the Dutch get recognizition in this battle ?
You can say that more about the Germans on the British side, but it’s because there were a lot of different nations involved but all were under British command so to make life easier it’s just the British flag
They were wearing false beards and sunglasses
How did you implement this war in Google Earth?
This version of the battle of Waterloo is incomplete. It lacks the considerable Netherlands contribution (about 18.500 troops, commanded by the Prince of Orange, later King Willem II) to the allied effort.
Wellington's Army was a mixed bag of British, Belgian, Dutch, and German troops. Would be better if the flags are made to match but I understand it would be a tall order to locate all of them in the battle lines.
Obviously Wellington‘s army was mixed.
It included also troops from Hanover, Brunswick, Nassau and the King‘s German Legion.
@@HingerlAlois The largest group were Germans
Rustâg
@@HerrLBrodersenYep definitely the largest, it’s was 50% German, including KGL then 30% British and 20% Dutch and Belgian these percents were just for infantry, cavalry was 50% British and 25% German and 25 Dutch and Belgian
Utterly brilliant! Thank you :) Any chance of English Civil war?
But that can't be right. I was just reading on Quora about how the Americans saved the British at Waterloo and about how we should be eternally grateful for it!
General John Wayne and his Marines supported by Cavalry (throws tin coffee cup to one side).
The Americans are the white flag with the eagle on it if I’m not mistaken 🦅wTf iS a KiloMeTeR🤣
@@sg0310Waterloo. June 18 1815. Cheers
@@static242 Hum ... Feb 18 1815 ? End of the 1812 war ? just sayin ...
Yeah, if it hadn't been for the yanks we'd all be speaking french now. Parbleu!
Wellington did not win this battle, he did not lose,because the Prussians arrived in time. Otherwise he certainly would not have won.
The Prussians arriving was part of the pre-arranged plan. If there was a strong possibility of them not getting there, there wouldn't have been a battle in the first place.
He achieved his strategic goal... not sure how else one could define victory. Sure, he didn't crush the French army 1v1 but that was never his aim or the aims of the coalition at large.
Besides he was outmanned, and notably outgunned. He had available many fewer cannon, which was always a problem.
All these Napoleon fan boys.... you really don't like Britain do you? 😂😂😂😂
Where is Grouchy
It seems that the British were doing a pretty good job holding off the French even without the Prussians. Why is their arrival considered so critical?
Don't know
I'm thinking the same way
Cause wellington would have lost without the arrival of prussians, he even said himself
Loved the slow ominous creeping of the Prussians from the top right.
Looks like as soon as anyone started seeing old guard retreating they knew it was time to get out of dodge.
One of Napolean's strategies were to use the big lane highways in the map.
And the english still think Wellington won this battle ? At 16:00, the english army is collapsing. "Give me night or give me Blücher" said Wellington, it clearly means they were in big troubles
I believe those were the cavalry charges of Ney that achieved nothing.
@@CptBritish the english were collapsing, the retreat was near to be ordered, but they received a messenger from Blücher. At 16:00, the english army was defeated.
@@durandil Defeated is a strong word. That French attack retreated twice and still reformed. Not saying all was fine and dandy but it clearly wasn't defeated.
@@CptBritish when an army prepare to retreat, they are defeated. They are saved by the prussians. If they arrived half an hour later, the english would have retreated to Bruxelles and all the french army would have face the prussians
Wellington never intended to fight the French on his own. He was in trouble because Blucher was delayed; without the flanking attack he would've had to retreat, but the Prussian army arrived according to plan and the battle was over for Napoleon.
Recommend using unit type symbols instead of just flags for battles at this scale. Would be nice to distinguish between cavalry and infantry.
Napoleon was forced to attack, even if the position on the field was terrible (uphill), but he had to because he was slightly superior in number of soldiers, Wellington rightly waited for Blücher.
Music at 2:40??
Its at description
Wherent there also Dutch soldiers?
Amazing!
The Casualty Ratio is insane.
All those British flags.The force that Wellington commanded consisted of Dutch,Belgians and Germanic States.There were more Germans fighting under Wellington than British,particularly the Kings (German) legion.Germany would not become a nation until 1871.Of course Wellington was Bailed out by the Prussians,without which Wellington would of LOST the battle of Waterloo.
Yes but WELLINGTON commanded them. The flags are used to show the tactics. This is what this whole video is about. Not how some random soldiers from different countries fought.
Wrong, there was around 30,000 British troops total more than any of nationality in his army, but do keep on spouting lies.
7:50 *La garde meurt mais ne se rend pas !*
Incredible perspective. It looked like the British didn’t move until 9pm but once they did it was all over
What was that movie were Blutcher went,
"Come ride wit me. Ima go git that Napoleon".
Why were the Prussian stats increasing instead of decreasing as they engaged the French?
Fun, but not very accurate. Especially the end. To name a few: The guard was repelled in part by the coming up of Chassé with his fresh Dutch troops, slamming into the guard's flanks. Plus, the Allied forces on the front were completely decimated by that time. But the biggest issue: Only about +/- 33% of the allies troops were British. Especially the Dutch are missing here ( The Hanover Troop were fighting under the British flag, even though they were German) So your flags are wrong. Very frustrating that even after +200 years the British propaganda of the time managed to rewrite history even though the true facts are common knowledge now ( well outside the Anglo nations at least). Let's hope we don't get the same with Ridley Scott's version of Napoleon! :)
You're right. 😎
There were only 26-27,000 British soldiers involved, + 5,000 Germans from the Kings German Legion, the rest were Dutch, Hanoverians, Braunschweigers and Nassauers.
I also can't understand the hype about Wellington at all.
In my opinion he failed two days before Waterloo because he wasted time before responding to the Prussians' warning and finally sending troops to Quatre Bras, whereby a Dutch officer was already organizing the defense independently, and at Waterloo he didn't do more than anyone else in his Position had done. Any other general with a bit of combat experience would have done the same thing, namely choosing and using a good defensive position.
Nothing that makes you have to burst out in big cheers just because someone does something obvious.
And Wellington made no more than hold a good defensive position to withstand an opponent of roughly equal strength until the Prussians appeared and brought victory...
@@raka522yeah, all that hype about a general who never lost a battle
@@DanBeech-ht7sw Thanks to Blücher and his 50,000 Prussians, Wellington stayed that way... ;-)
@@raka522 Napoleon had allies fighting for him too at times, did he not?now I think about it, so did Hannibal and most of the roman emperors. With a bit of thought I could recall a number of other famous generals too. Pretty sure Alexander's army wasn't just Macedonians. Persians too.
@@DanBeech-ht7sw Napoleon had allies who fought for him?
Can it really be considered an ally when Napoleon conquers a country, rearranges the borders a little, appoints a close relative or his own general as ruler there?
Or if you occupy a country and force its ruler to pay reparations that include soldiers for him?
These were all allies who were either forced into it or dependent on him.
The only people who really voluntarily fought with and for Napoleon were the Poles, but Poland no longer existed at that point and they only did it because Napoleon promised them that he would make sure they could form their own state again, which however, this was not the case after Napoleon's defeat.
Download link
**Waterloo**
English: Making War, Dying
French: Making War, Dying
Prussians: Making Luove Baybae! Multiplying!!!
dang the six french regiments/platoons in 7:45 getting encircled
can i use the video to make another video in indonesia languange?? i will put the credit thou.
WHERE is Grouchy?!!? I NEED THOSE MEN!!!
When I saw the title of the video, I was intrigued. I am a student of the battle of Waterloo. I have flown over the battlefield and walked parts of the battlefield and was hoping that this video would add to my knowledge. It failed completely.
1 Having a minute by minute casualty counter for the opposing forces is sheer fantasy. Nobody at the time could have estimated this.
2 Even having a thorough knowledge of the topography of the battlefield and the phases of the battle, I found it hard to make sense of the movements of the tiny flags on the map.
Some advice:
1 Name the key features of the opposing positions on the battlefield. Particularly Hougomont, La Haye Sainte and Plancenoit
2 Distinguish between the phases of the battle. Your video does not enable a viewer to distinguish between an attack of cavalry vs an attack by infantry.
3 Ditch the casualty counter. Not because it is a guess but because it really has no value in gauging the progress of the battle.
I'm disappointed.
This is practically how every video of his looks like, I understand your point but really you can't tell him to change his whole video style.
@@PVZzombieguy If he makes poor videos, he isn't going to improve unless he gets feedback.
@@grahamhodge8313 I don't think you can call these videos poor, but I get what you mean.
very nice but it would have been better if allied troops were depicted with their own flags (dutch, belgian, german etc troops) and single units were divided into artillery, cavalry and infantry.
There were no belgian troops there lol country didnt even exist at the time dude. It would later break away with the help of the same french you see here. The flemish traitors of their own country(united netherlands) would become secondrate citizens in this belgian "nation"under frenchspeaking overlords until the constitutional changes of the 1960s...
that highway must have been a challenge
Imagine benching Davout to be a minister of war for a Battle of this magnitude.
Why Prusian numbers keep increasing instead of decreasing?
After the Battle of Ligny, the Prussian army was still around 95,000 men, who made their way to Wavre in heavy rain. The soldiers slept there for a few hours and then marched straight on to Waterloo over completely waterlogged paths.
Since Blücher recognized the danger to Wellington, the Prussians immediately intervened in the fighting without waiting for the entire army to be complete.
Because more and more Prussians appeared on the battlefield over time, their number continued to increase instead of decreasing.
It's always good to defend the freeway.
Hi. How accurate is the time in relation to troop movement ? What is the source of this? Thank you.
Music ID plz?
French are very good in fast and organised retreating
?