"The Prince of Orange" Topic

It appears from several secondary accounts that I have read that the Prince of Orange did not order Colonel Ompteda's brigade of the KGL at Waterloo into line, causing it to be subsequently jumped by French cuirassiers and ruined as a fighting unit.

I found the following in Gareth Glover's The Waterloo Archive Volume II: The German Sources, on page 89:

'The enemy launched many cavalry attacks against the division's position, causing our battalions to form squares. Only the 5th Battalion had to remain flexible due to the terrain on which it was posted, deploy in line, or form square, because it was exposed to both kinds of troop bodies [infantry and cavalry]. The battalion repulsed three attacks of the enemy cavalry; in one of these our square was not yet fully formed, and the enemy had moved up to 8 paces from us. Before us was also enemy infantry, which was supported by artillery. Colonel von Ompteda, the commander of our brigade…remained with us, realizing the seriousness of our situation. At half past five o'clock we had formed square, the Prince of Orange in person gave the order to deploy [to form line] and to drive the enemy infantry out of La Haye Sainte. Our colonel alerted the prince to the fact that enemy cavalry was hidden behind some bushes and that therefore, we ought to be provided with cavalry support. The prince then rode off; but a short time later the prince's ADC, Lord Somerset, came at full gallop with the same order. We then deployed, leapt over a ditch before us with a cheerful 'Hurrah!'; the enemy infantry gave way, but as we were driving that infantry before us, our little troop was attacked in flank and rear in to time at all by an enemy cuirassier regiment. The carnage was terrible, until we were rescued by our cavalry…'

So, it appears that the Prince of Orange did order Ompteda into line…

Yes my understanding from the latest rash of secondary sources is that the Prince did override Ompteda's protests.

However, more generally, the Prince comes out much better in the campaign overall than previously protrayed. Particularly from reading Erwin Muilwjick's two volumes on the Netherlands Field Army, it seems the Prince was not only as brave as a lion personally, but also an effective and conscientious commander, taking great pains to raise the effectiveness and preparedness of his command prior to the campaign opening.

Agree.

Erwin is an excellent historian and his contributions greatly enhance the historiography of the campaign. The Dutch-Belgians were maligned for far too long.

The Prince was young and inexperienced and could be expected to make mistakes. Every commander does, even the best ones.

As I'm sure you know, he did much better in the later Belgian War of Independence.

Reportedly he enjoyed considerable popularity in what is now Belgium (then the Southern Netherlands), as well as in the Netherlands for his affability and moderation. After fighting broke out, he did his utmost in Brussels as a peace broker and when that failed he was appointed military leader of the Ten Days campaign in Belgium; performing creditably.

We all make mistakes in Youth but he appears to have learnt by them.

Yes he did. Talk about education by immersion. Fighting in two battles in three days will take its toll.

If the Prince hadn't gone along with his chief of staff Constant de Rebeque and disobeyed Wellington's orders to concentrate at Nivelles, there would not have been a battle at Quatre Bras. Blucher might well have been crushed at Ligny when Ney appeared in his rear.

So even if Orange wasn't a tactical ace, he made a very important decision on June 16. Too bad they built that mound at Waterloo.

Is this a lot of he said she said? Wonder how they would have all done without ol Nosey and his troops? Love the love given to all nowadays, after all it is a fuzzy feel good EU now and we can't have bad mouthing and the like of other peoples heroes (especially Belgium ones :)). As a miniatures character Orange always gets to be put out to danger I've noted. Wonder if he will get better treatment now :)
Cheers happy gaming the big one for 2015 all :D

Is this a lot of he said she said?

No mate its not. My opinion, at least, is based solely on Erwin's impeccably researched and evidenced work, which makes it clear how diligent and effective he was in the preparation in his Corps area, and how well he understood and operated within Wellington's constraints.

Look I'm no pc 'all must have prizes' trendy left treehugging hippy, and 've got the scars and gongs to prove it, and my record on defending Wellington on this and other fora is there for all too see – search under 'Sparker', my previous c/s…

But I do think, in British popular culture at least, the Prince of Orange has been unfairly treated, and I'm glad that, for once, revisionist historians are rehabilitating a long dead hero, instead of pulling one down into the mire. Good news all round!

link

p. 286 ff. the report about Ompteda's last attack and death.

The prince of Oranien was shown that French cavalry was waiting for a counter attack, still he insisted that the battalion (already reduced to ca. 200 men) advanced.

In "British miniature wargaming and military history" popular culture. If I mentioned the Prince of Orange to my non history geek mates I can picture the reactions now….

"What off the tango advert?"

"Harrys not that ginger!"

"Orange County has a Royal family?"

"Was he the guy that invaded Belfast and killed the Catholics?"

"Don't be stupid Oranges don't have princes…."

A funny breed the Non-amateur historian/wargamer.

Saprky +1 for the win.

Revisionist history is good and worthwhile when it is based on actual research (not Siborne or Oman entirely) and does not carry favour or prejudice.

I have really enjoyed seeing the new research com out, as it explains so much more of the detail of the battle, rather than the potted history of "it woz us Brits that won it, innit" and my Blandford history from when I were a nipper. I have no axe to grind, but reading accounts of just what impact the allied and Prussian forces had on the campaign and the decisive battle makes it a thoroughly worthwhile pursuit.

And it's ok – the French still lose…

Orange's decision at QB isn't new. AF Becke covered it in his 1936 Waterloo book. It's just that many ignore it, preferring things like the version where Sharpe shoots Orange near the end of the battle to save troops from his bungling.

Revisionist history is good and worthwhile when it is based on actual research (not Siborne or Oman entirely) and does not carry favour or prejudice.

Well posted and I'd extend Sparker's comments about the Prince to traditional representations of the non-British formations. Still, nothing new there