"The Dutch and Belgians at Quatre Bras" Topic

Osprey Publishing have just posted the third in the series of articles I have written to coincide with the release of Waterloo 1815 (1) Quatre Bras. This article contains information on the Dutch and Belgians which some of you may find interesting.

You can read the article by following the link to the Osprey website: link

John

Terrific stuff John, and exactly what we need heading into 2015 to assist in re-dressing the balance.

Thanks for the link!

As the Dutch would say; Dank u wel!

I don't know why, but I've always found QB more interesting than Waterloo itself. Thanks for the articles.

In addition to this, I cannot more highly recommend the books and articles on the Netherlands Field Army during the Waterloo Campaign by Erwin Muilwijk available on Lulu.com

A fabulous set.

Well done. The Dutch-Belgians were not the equal of Wellington's Peninsular veterans, but there were some British units present that weren't either. The Allied troops fought well at Quatre-Bras and at Waterloo.

@vtsaogames

It is interesting when you look into the details of the officers and men who comprised the various British battalions at Waterloo, as I have. For example, the 2nd Btns of the Coldstream and 3rd Foot Guards, who were little engaged at Quatre Bras, but who were distinguished during the fighting at Hougoumont, were composed by a very large number of ex militiamen. Large drafts from the militia had been absorbed into the two battalions in November 1813, and transported almost immediately to the Low Countries in December of that year. The only action they saw prior to Waterloo was the disasterous storming of Bergen-op-Zoom in March 1814, where the Light Companies were captured.

I raise this point as it proves that you do not necessarily need veteran men to perform well, but veteran officers to lead well. Undoubtedly, there were veteran officers in the Brunswick, Nassau and Dutch/Belgian battalions (many of whom had fought for the French).

John

I think it is marvellous that such recent work, as your's, has shown that the most elite units could be shaky and the "useless" Allied units could over-perform in The Hundred Days Campaign, even when "drunken" (chance would have been a fine thing!).

Nosey's units were not the Peninsula veterans, but they stood. Slender Billy's lads did not defect wholesale, as predicted; they saved the day at QB. "Bylandt's Brigade has broken; Plug the gap will you?" we all know from Sergei's film, but it turns out they then rallied and their mates may have helped smashed the final Guard attack.

There is even the suggestion that the Prussians' contribution was understated……..no. That is going too far. (and the ball did cross the line in 1966, of course it did…by at least a yard)

@deadhead

I have a question for you: Which of the following locations do you feel were the most important to the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo?

A. Hougoumont

B. La Haie Sainte

C. Plancenoit

I know which of these I would choose.

John

What a brilliant question. It is too good to potentially lose in this topic. Will everyone who could contribute even notice it?

Without Plancenoit, Boney could have extricated himself and his army to fight another day. How long they would then have lasted is another matter. Without Plancenoit he would have had the best part of a small Corps, plus the Young and Middle Guard to use against the "Allied" line, so the debacle might never have even started. Without Blucher's threat to the right flank of Gen Buonaparte would DoW even have stood in front that wood, on that ridge?

Was Papelotte more important than any of them to Nosey? Remember, all DoW asked for was support on his left with one corps (turned out to be Ziethen). The outflanking was more than he could have dreamed of. It seems forgotten that our Arthur was asking for support to hold his line, nothing more. Never mind Hofschererererer seeming "partisan" ( bless him, he is right) Blucher's lot were incredible on the day. OK, slow, through awful terrain, mediocre staff work, but then professional infantry work FIBU areas, with totally irresponsible (outstanding as it turned out) generalship, in taking that risk.

My vote is C.

A. A diversion that did mop up much of Reille's lads, but seems to have involved almost as many of Nosey's as Boney's in the end. The place burns down. It is in a hollow overlooked by the ridge. Unless Boney plans an outflanking manoeuvre not sure it really is that crucial. Is it that useful to the French? It was a delaying action, to hold the line

B. LHS was more critical. If it fell early in d'Erlon's assault, not sure Household Brigade counterattack could have been so successful. French Horse Artillery there and 95th out of the sandpit, that early in the day. Centre is getting weaker and Prussians are nowhere near. HMMMMM

Naw. I love counterfactual history. The Hitler/Napoleon Options, What If?, Rising Sun Victorious, Hitler Triumphant etc etc etc…I have them all in my study.

I'll go for Plancenoit, even if I know that without LHS there would have been no Plancenoit. Hougoumont is a better story, made for a better visit and is a more attractive modelling exercise.

What a great question.

and yet……….Answer D Papelotte. If Blucher had not been such a lunatic as to march away from his supply lines, across a threatening pursuing force, with a beaten army, made up of exhausted troops, to keep a promise to support an army that might well not even have been there, that had failed to support him two days earlier (for perfectly good reasons we now know)………..DoW would not have spent a minute at "Waterloo".

We would all now be dominated by European rulers and holidaying in France…..hang on….

Yes, the answer is down in than hollow that no-one bothers with on the East of the field, or maybe on the climb out of Lasne, which seems a doddle now with a tarmac road and four wheel drive!

My answer would also be C. I'll keep this short, but the outcome at Plancenoit decided the battle.

John

P.S. You may have the pleasure of adding the question as a topic, if you so wish.

Agree with the posters above that the Prussians at Plancenoit sealed Napoleon's fate.

The collapse of DoW's army was just a matter of time…

The Prussians were not the final little straw that broke the camel's back, they were the elephant that totally snapped it in half…

They added way too much weight to the allies for the exhausted French to have any chance.

The most appropriate analogy I can think of was that it was very much like two exhausted punch drunk fighters staggering in the ring after many rounds of pummeling each other when a fresh fighter steps in and ends it…

Frank

This gentleman (C. Yemm of Sotke-on-Trent) is clearly not a fan of the Prince of Orange, and his review is highly uncomplimentary: link

I think that when you investigate the various accounts and the series of events which led to the 69th Regiment of Foot being overrun by the French Cuirassiers, it was not the fault of Prince Willem. It is almost impossible for an author to deal with reviews of this type on Amazon (and other platforms).

John

You're always going to have one or some detractors, especially ones who don't even have a good argument. I umpire adult softball and a couple of weeks ago I made a call that one guy didn't like. That didn't bother me, but he wanted the last word to tell me I was wrong, which I let him have. Later I made a safe call at first base (for his team) and he sarcastically asked me if I was sure. I really wanted to say, "No, you're right; he was out," just to really tick him off, but I remember that there are 19 other guys out there who aren't like him, and so I just ignored him.

Michael,

I agree with you. But this demonsrates the extent that bad or 'false' history has influenced people. The Hereditary Prince of Orange-Nassau was not responsible for the 69th Regiment of Foot being overrun. For someone to discount work for this reason reflects the difficulties modern writers have when presenting material (based on solid research) that does not simply say the same 'old' things. (I'm sure a number of the Dutch and Belgian TMP members would also be offended by this individuals abusive opinion.)

Kind regards

John

I would think most people would think this guy is still stuck back in the early 19th Century. (Or at least the 1980s.)

this guy just wants to provoke on the cheapest sort of way, ignore

He is duly ignored.

I suppose it is not the reviews one should be worried about as an author, but instead be delighted by the fact that one is quoted for his efforts by other historians! That is the true impact on history ;-)
link