"Who would have commanded the allied army at Waterloo?" Topic

Who would have commanded the allied army at Waterloo? If Wellington was not avaliable who would have commanded? Also if Napoleon had been killed would the French army just given up?

Interesting one – also who would have been C in C if both Wellington and Blucher were present at the beginning?

Naturally, Sharpe would have taken control.

Unfortunately, the Prince of Orange might well have been in command of the Allied Army

If Wellington had been in a position to pass command, I think that he would have preferred Hill to take over as he was a trusted 'Spanish' lieutenant. The Prince of Orange might indeed have tried to 'pull rank' but hopefully common sense would have prevailed.
Considering that the 100 Days was an attempt at dynastic revival, without Napoleon it would have lost its raison d'etre and therefore I suspect that the French would have called for an armistice and gone home.

I think the political pressure to appoint the Prince of Orange would have been insurmountable.

Had Wellington not been a Duke, I doubt his reputation and the amount of British involvement would have been enough to get him the job, but as Duke, and with the most troops and experience and with all the money, that was enough to swing it for the Dutch.

The key point, I think, was that they had to maintain a coallition, and if Britain had just demanded control, I doubt the Dutch would have accepted Hill or anyone else who was not of sufficient royal rank.

and without them, the Brits would have had to depart until the Austrians arrived (since the Brits would not have put their men under Blucher, and could not stand in the field alone until he arrived).

you only need to look at the state of the politics whenever N was not in the field.

Napoleon knew what he was doing when he sprang out at that time, correctly judging that there was almost nothng to unite the rest of europe against France.
he had simply misjudged how hated he was personally, and that the war would become about him and not about France, thus uniting everyone against him (albeit temporarily).

So orange in command.
Delay when N hits the border
Prussians defeated first,as per, but with no one to march to join they pull back to teh east again to regroup, the allied army is also defeated in turn (after doing something stupid like deploying on an open plain).

N secures a truce in the north, and turns to face Austria, who do a very good job of not getting beaten for long enough for the Russians to arrive and save the day.

The Tsar gets to keep the giant statue of Napoleon somewhere in the Hermitage.

Best case scenario, the brits land well to the east and add two divisions to the Prussians in an uneasy joint command which does little but doesn't fail either.

I think the political pressure to appoint the Prince of Orange would have been insurmountable.

Had Wellington not been a Duke, I doubt his reputation and the amount of British involvement would have been enough to get him the job, but as Duke, and with the most troops and experience and with all the money, that was enough to swing it for the Dutch.

The key point, I think, was that they had to maintain a coallition, and if Britain had just demanded control, I doubt the Dutch would have accepted Hill or anyone else who was not of sufficient royal rank.

and without them, the Brits would have had to depart until the Austrians arrived (since the Brits would not have put their men under Blucher, and could not stand in the field alone until he arrived).

you only need to look at the state of the politics whenever N was not in the field.

Napoleon knew what he was doing when he sprang out at that time, correctly judging that there was almost nothng to unite the rest of europe against France.
he had simply misjudged how hated he was personally, and that the war would become about him and not about France, thus uniting everyone against him (albeit temporarily).

So orange in command.
Delay when N hits the border
Prussians defeated first,as per, but with no one to march to join they pull back to teh east again to regroup, the allied army is also defeated in turn (after doing something stupid like deploying on an open plain).

N secures a truce in the north, and turns to face Austria, who do a very good job of not getting beaten for long enough for the Russians to arrive and save the day.

The Tsar gets to keep the giant statue of Napoleon somewhere in the Hermitage.

Best case scenario, the brits land well to the east and add two divisions to the Prussians in an uneasy joint command which does little but doesn't fail either.

Interesting.

I'd go with the rest and say Orange. Quarter Bras might have played out much the same. But Waterloo would have been bad.

I'd concur that the Russians from the east and Austrians moving up from Italy would have saved the day. Maybe what's left of the Dutch and British/ Hanovarians would hunker down and rebuild … Hope to strike south once the big boys arrive.

I think William of Orange wouldn't have been a strategic disaster. He had the experienced Constant de Rebeque as his chief of staff, who guessed right at Quatre Bras. Orange listened to his advice, which was why there was a division of troops in front of Ney on the 16th. Orders called for Perponcher to concentrate at Nivelles.

Now if he'd got into a battle, he'd have been whipped. Good advice only goes so far.

Whoever replaces Wellington has to enjoy the confidence of the Prussian High Command (or at least of Blucher). Only by mutual trust and co-operation could they have prevailed. Slender Billy had more insight into his limitations than novelists or TV dramatists suggest. See how he handed over all the cavalry to Uxbridge the day before Waterloo…but I cannot see Blucher being quite so willing to stake all on a march from Wavre for The Prince. On the day it seems agreed that Uxbridge was to be 2iC…an emergency measure surely.

Death of Napoleon early in the day? "May I try a shot , sir?"………"Oh go on then, if you must, damn you"……..never really thought about it before! I have visions of the Marshallate gathered around the corpse till some one says "Ah………….right…….well, now then……"

Somehow there would seem very little point. There is no successor closer than Vienna, some of us are now in this up to our necks and might be better to be heading West as fast as we can. Tell Orson Welles that we may have been a bit hasty……..

The poor Prince of Orange, see what happens when you mishandle one British battalion, the (British) writers never forget! Seriously though, I agree with deadhead and vtsaogames the Prince has gotten a bad rap and wouldn't have been as bad as people may think. Assuming all the other players are the same, he had good staff and commanders. He was good at inspiring the troops and personally led attacks at QB. The risk may have been that he would try and charge in with a unit and lose control of the battle.

As for Blucher, I don't think Wellington made any difference for him. He hated Napoleon and would have would have marched regardless of who commanded.

Since the Allies declared war on Napoleon, not France, should the Emperor buy the farm I would assume the purpose was completed and a painful (for France) peace would have quickly followed.

I've posed the question before of had Wellington not been available, who would have commanded in Belgium. Let's say he accepted the offer to command in North America and some Yankee sharpshooter….. Anyway, Hope was high on the seniority list, but I suspect health would have kept him from commanding. The list of senior generals avilable gets highly suspect after that and the Prince might not have been so bad in comparison. However talented Hill was, there were others ahead of him that politically would have gotten chosen over him to start a campaign. If Wellington dies or is incapacitated at Waterloo, and why not, almost everyone around him was, then Hill would seem to obvious choice. Uxbridge was technically the second in command, but let's say for the sake of the army that he is wounded and not available. Hill IMHO would have done a fine job of either protecting the army in retreat, or in following up the vanquished French.

The Prince of Orange WAS in command, and was convinced to turn it over to Wellington. That's how he ended up in command of I corps.

Christopher Plummer.

If Wellington had not been available, I suspect that there would not have been an Allied army; no other British general had the reputation and authority to command such a multinational force and the British would not have let their troops serve under a damned foreigner.

As for Napoleon dying at Waterloo, then I feel that either one of two things would have happened:

1. The French army heads south very quickly

2. The French army stays on the field

In the latter case, I suspect that the outcome depends on when it happened. If it was before the unpleasantness started, then I suspect that Soult, Ney and a few others would have tried to negotiate an armistice with Wellington and safe conduct for themselves.

If it was while both sides were fully engaged then who knows? Perhaps Soult would have tried to win the battle in order to secure a negotiating position (the odds on him winning were miniscule with Blucher approaching), or he might have started a fighting withdrawal back to France.

Interesting speculation.

Interesting speculation. I am also of the opinion there would not have been much of an allied army in Flanders if the British were not present. This option leaving only Orange Nassau, Brunswich, Dutch and Belgian regiments.

I am curious if the Belgians would have pursued an earlier move toward independance further undermining the army arrayed on the frontier.

Cheers,

I think Black Adder would have been capable.

Beau Brummel?
There is an endless supply of available fops. Some of them Milords!
Just read the Sharpe novels!

If Wellington had not been available, I suspect that there would not have been an Allied army; no other British general had the reputation and authority to command such a multinational force and the British would not have let their troops serve under a damned foreigner.

The only POSSIBLE answer. The condition of Britain's participation in a continental adventure in a coalition force was complete control of that force under the personal leadership of the ONLY general who could conceivably enjoy the full confidence of HM government.

Without the Duke, there is no coalition army and no Belgian campaign in 1815. The War of 1815 would have been fought on the Rhine between Napoleon and the same guys who beat him at Leipzig.

The poor Prince of Orange, see what happens when you mishandle one British battalion, the (British) writers never forget! Seriously though, I agree with deadhead and vtsaogames the Prince has gotten a bad rap and wouldn't have been as bad as people may think. Assuming all the other players are the same, he had good staff and commanders. He was good at inspiring the troops and personally led attacks at QB. The risk may have been that he would try and charge in with a unit and lose control of the battle.

As for Blucher, I don't think Wellington made any difference for him. He hated Napoleon and would have would have marched regardless of who commanded.

Couldn't agree more. I also feel that with Britain funding everyone's war effort an Englishman would have been in charge of the Anglo-Allied army regardless.

I believe Wellington said, "I do not think it would have done if I had not been there."

I shudder to think what the outcome might have been with any other leader.

ABBA would have to choose another song for the International contest

You're overlooking one of the most remarkable men as well as an excellent general and a noble for good measue; General Thomas Graham, 1st Baron Lynedoch.

One would think his choice would be self-evident. And yes it could have been done with Grahame.

Bob Coggins

I am not convinced by the claim for Graham; Wellington was a major figure on the European stage with the status to deal with monarchs and the most senior of generals and field marshals. Graham was a far less well known and authoritative figure.

Good soldier though. But perhaps would lack the pulling power with the big nobs from Europe.

Duke of York … bit old, but no hills for him to get stuck halfway up.

The whole subject of British command is based on two major factors, seniority and political influence. Look at the problems Wellington had during the Peninsular where Horse Guards (the War Office) would saddle him with the likes of General Erskine.

So choosing a replacement may not turn up the most effective general from a wargamers point of view.