"Waterloo - Myth And Reality " Topic

"So much has been written on the Waterloo

Campaign that, even in the smallest details,

nothing new can be revealed.

So wrote William Hyde Kelly in his introduction to a book on elements of the Waterloo campaign in 1905; it is therefore with great trepidation that any historian treads this well worn path more than a century later. However, Kelly was wrong in his assessment for many reasons and numerous volumes have continued to appear about this battle at very regular intervals; nor is there any sign of this easing.

Indeed, as we approach the two hundredth anniversary of the battle, this will only lead to an explosion of new works and hopefully greater public awareness and interest in a fascinating and vital period in the development of both Europe and Great Britain and its Empire.

This whole period of history is unfortunately too often overlooked by schools today, and is shamefully ignored by the National Curriculum, causing a younger generation to underestimate its importance, if they ever get to hear of it at all.

The national commemorations of the bicentenary of the battle in 2015 will undoubtedly be relatively muted as the British government are clearly loath to upset their European partners; although commemorations for the centenary of the opening of the 1914-18 conflict will rightly be marked in a suitable fashion. This political decision is based on a failure to understand the equal importance of both events in European history. Recent announcements by the government regarding funding for the repair of Hougoumont farmhouse in time for 2015 do give some hope for a more enlightened attitude to the celebrations.

Few today realise that the epithet �The Great War� was used by the world to describe the Napoleonic wars, which culminated at Waterloo, for an entire century before 1918. The campaign in 1815 marked the end of twenty-three years of almost continuous pan-European warfare which touched every corner of the globe and could rightly be claimed to be the first real World War.

The horrors of the 1793-1815 war led directly to a new type of politics within Europe with the emergence of the age of Congress. This presaged a century of relative European peace, within which numerous territory disputes and revolutions continued to flare, but the congress system did prevent these localised conflicts reigniting the entire continent in all out war…"
See here
link

Anyone have read this book yet?
If the answer is yes, comments please?

Thanks in advance for your guidance.

Amicalement
Armand

Yes I've read it, and can strongly recommend it – not just because the author is a fellow ex Royal Navy officer! Gareth has a long and strong record of archive work on the Hundred days, so this is not just another bandwagon book. And as well as dispelling some of the myths put about by Napoleon, Victor Hugo and crowd, it is also an excellent narrative of some of the key points of the battle.

The text is far better than the cover and illustrations. I was put off by the cover pic of a Polish lancer (in full dress too) taking on the Scots Greys. Sergei B could get away with it maybe, in 1970, but not a respected historian….especially if we are talking about myths! The "modern" illustrations are a little lurid and better suited to the box top of a set of plastic figures. I'll just say they are not to my taste anyway……

But if you get past that and actually read the book, well worth it.

I preferred his six volumes of the Waterloo Archive……..this is obviously far cheaper………I'll leave it at that.

Don't you think that Gareth chose that cover illustration for a reason? 'myth and reality? I think the cover is pretty good for it's (as I see it) subliminal message.

The book itself is pretty good but for instance, it is at odds with Erwin Muilwijk over a key point of the Guards repulse and my idea of what exactly happened at Genappe.

I agree that his Waterloo archives are excellent.

Paul :)

I agree with all that has been said. This is an excellent book with lots of information and a very readable style. In fact I would go as far as to say that if you only have one or two books on the campaign, this should be one of them.

It's good point, probably too subtle for a thicko like me. Illustrate the cover with an oft repeated error…….

Did strike me as a surprising mistake for this author. I maybe did miss the point (unlike Ponsonby)

Unless this--or any book--is self-published, it is the publisher, and not the author, who usually has the final say about the cover, as well as the design of the book, including how many illustrations to include.

In this case, Mr. Glover may have agreed or not with the cover art.

Thanks for the comments boys!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

At risk of flogging a dead horse…I got this book off the shelf tonight and it suddenly dawned on me why the cover looks so wrong. Many of the characters are not just in full dress (and British horses have full tails) but many of the figures are mirror images of reality!

I first noticed the left handed lancer, then the lack of a sword scabbard, then the epaulette etc all on the wrong side….then the penny dropped.

Let me redesign the cover (admitting that some..some …not all….of the RNBDs are now wrong). Huge respect for Glover. I have all six of his Waterloo Archives etc but, here……it was surely not his fault of course. Anyone with any knowledge of Waterloo (who was not a Russian film director anyway) would know the Poles did not counterattack the Union Brigade.

Shows how computer generated images can let you down!

Maggie is absolutely correct. Publishers have the final OK on covers and generally for titles as well. Sometimes they like what the author wants, and sometimes they don't.

Is he any relation to Michael or Richard Glover (and were they related)?

The Lancer is now OK, but the Scots Grey behind him is now backwards :(

Exactly!

I did say not all the RNBDs are now correct…..but some are! Like the chap falling back off his saddle….he was reversed before.

I still think the illustrations of this book (not just the cover) really let it down, to judge by the standards of this chap's usual work.

To be honest, more than a few of my latest purchases on The Hundred Days Campaign have made me despair for the illustrators. There is a descent into comic book stuff.

It might be called "Heroic posing", but I think there is much recent artwork that is truly ridiculous. The Victor, Valiant or Hurricane did it far better 50 years ago (UK comics)

Hey deadhead… I think these two are a little better.

Right-click on the image and copy image address. Then click on the image to enlarge it. These two are big.

My apologies for repeating the same images, but these links are more reliable (from the artist's own website).

Click on the images to enlarge them. These two are big.

link

link