"Two new titles-Waterloo and Ligny and Wavre" Topic

If you thought there were already enough titles covering Waterloo and the 1815 campaign, especially after the number of new titles appearing in 2015, then you'd be wrong. It seems there are more to come, or rather, will be popping up later in the year.

Grouchy's Waterloo, the Battles of Ligny and Wavre by Andrew Field – due 30th April.

Waterloo, The Truth at Last by Paul Dawson – due September

Well, although it is always nice to see new Napoleonic titles, and long may they keep coming, I find someone advertising that they suddenly know the 'truth' about battles or campaigns a bit of a put off, no matter how much 'new' research they claim to have undertaken or unseen material viewed. But, you never know, the author might surprise us yet and I wonder if Dawson's new 'truth' will support or oppose Stephen Beckett's 'truth' about Waterloo?

But while waiting for the 'truth' to appear, I'm really looking forward to Andrew Field's new title, especially after reading his previous work.

I think Napoleon 'revealed' the 'truth' about Waterloo when he was at St Helena: he said quite bluntly that no one, including himself, did their duty there.

Thanks my friend!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Considering the quality and number of authors/historians who have written about 1815, it seems somewhat odd that some of the material has never been looked at before and some of it has been sealed and unopened since 1816?

Yet along comes Paul and he gets to see or discover new unseen material and is allowed to open the sealed manuscripts? He must obviously have more clout than all the other researchers/authors/historians?

I'm really looking forward to seeing it, although I do hope it does not turn out to be just another case of the author's opinion and interpretation, rather than actual evidence that what he might be claiming in his book is actually the truth.

What new truth could there be – my beloved French lost. I have got over it.

But I guess I mustn't be harsh until it appears. But it is not an automatic buy. The last book I enjoyed on the subject were the two "French perspectives" – the French still lost, but there were some great snippets in there fleshing matters out.

I want a book who detail the performance of the VI° Corps against the Prussians… very detailed… till today there are not many books who put a point on there…

Amicalement
Armand

Gazzola: Thanks for posting this. I enjoyed Field's other books a lot so I will eagerly wait for this one. Think I will wait on Dawson's until some opinions are expressed by the experts. John Miller

Should all read this one…..

link

Yes, it is a must. As are many of the books dealing with the immediate aftermath and the historiography of Waterloo. The News from Waterloo, Went the Day Well?, Wellington and W etc

I haven't been impressed with what Dawson has written so far, but I'll be interested in these. There is an obsession with many writers for 'new' material instead of doing careful research and finding factual material that can be supported.

Using the term 'truth' in any historical work makes me somewhat skeptical. The researching and writing of history can reveal many 'truths' and everyone has their own version of it. However, the assembly of historical facts through research and coming to a logical conclusion is what I believe results in good historical writing. That is good historical methodology as well as historical inquiry.

I think Henry Adams made a comment about 'truth.' There are too many pitfalls and logical fallacies that an author can fall into when writing history. And Waterloo has been done to death for the past 200 years.

I always told my history students not to search for 'truth' because they probably wouldn't find it. I always stressed researching for facts and then coming to their own conclusions on a historical subject logically.

That being said, Andrew Field does excellent work and I'll buy any book with his name on it for the period.

I think that if a professional historian had been there, the morning after, to interview as many survivors as he or she wanted, we could still not have been sure as to events and their sequence. Indeed, had a bunch of historians been dispersed across the field, to see for themselves, the various famous incidents of the day, we would learn little more in practice. Smoke, distance, restricted line of sight, the confusion of battle.

I have just come back from an absolutely brilliant football ("Soccer") match. Great seats. Only one beer, as I was driving (made me quite the exception amongst West Ham fans today), but ask me what happened….? No idea. I know the score, I do remember who scored. But the rest is lost amongst the raw emotion, cheering, singing, winning.

You are right. There is much we will never know, but can only try to deduce. All based on recollections of survivors, often years after the events, or the limited contemporary documentation relating to supplies, weaponry, uniform distribution etc…even then supposing it actually reflects what did happen

I see there is another title by Dawson coming out this year, "Marshal Ney and Quatre Bras: New Perspectives on the Opening Battle of the Waterloo Campaign". Being as I am a fan boy of Ney I won't be able to resist that. Waterloo is my least favorite of Napoleonic battles, (not Ney's best day, don't like Bardin uniforms, the French loose, etc.), but it seems I will not be able to escape burdening my family by adding to my library. What they will do with these all books when pass on I don't know. John Miller

THE Truth at last! Finally, all in one book, so we can get rid of all these dozens of other books on the Waterloo, as we will one need THE One (my wife will be happy, finally some space on the bookshelfs). For once I agree completely with the comment of Brechtel 198…

Marcel1809

Never mind more shelf space, things might get worse. The forthcoming Waterloo 'truth' title might lead to further 'truth' titles on other campaigns and battles. Imagine only having one book on Waterloo, one book on the Russian campaign, one book on Austerlitz, one book on Napoleon conquering Italy – where will it all end. And all that work by all those historians and authors, totally wasted because they did not know the 'truth'. On the positive side, I suppose it will save us all a lot of money. LOL

Seriously, the so called 'truth' will probably just turn out to be yet another 'opinion' based on how and in what way 'one' author has 'interpreted' whatever material he has researched. And, of course, in another two hundred years someone will probably find another 'sealed' bundle that no one noticed or knew about, not even the present 'truth' finder.

"For once I agree completely with the comment of Brechtel 198…"

No surpise from my side that he puts Dawson in the worst light possible, he hates his guts, the same like with Dave Hollins.

Let's wait and see what those books have to offer and then discuss.

VW, you have a very bad habit of misrepresenting what people say, including me, and accusing me of things I haven't done.

I don't hate anyone, including you-though you have over the years certainly given cause to be thought less of because of your ad hominem attacks and misrepresentations.

You ought to grow up and knock it off. Your posting was intellectually dishonest and false.

The comment I made, if you take a look at it, is that I am not impressed with Dawson's work. I also said that I would be interested in his new books.

If you can't do anything but misrepresent what I have said, then

Brechtel198

Well said! To think that someone must hate someone because they disagree with their views or their work is just plain comical, if not absurd. It is hard to believe that anyone could actually think or believe that, let alone post such a ridiculous accusation? Perhaps von Winterfeldt's statement is revealing more about himself than anyone else?

It fits with a comment from Benjamin Franklin:

'We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.'
-Benjamin Franklin

Unfortunately, he pulls the same nonsense on the Napoleon Series.

Oh my God I seem, inadvertably, to have started another Shooting War between Brech198 and VW. Give it a rest guys, it's only WarGAMES and the battle of Waterloo is long over, peace has returned (and I can know as I pass there quite often)
My own opion of Dawson (opinion nothing more) is mainly based on the way he comments on Napoleonic topics in various social media (Fb etc) He certainly has done a lot of research but he also takes himself (himself not just his research) very seriously.

You didn't start anything. VW has been taking cheap shots for years and I'm steadily growing tired of it.

Agree on your assessment of Dawson.

Marcel1809

I hope Paul Dawson is taking himself seriously and has done a lot of research because I believe he is not only planning to bring out the 'truth' about Waterloo in September this year, he is also bringing out a 'unique contribution' about Napoleon and Grouchy (June) and a 'revelatory study' about Marshal Ney at Quatre Bras (July). Quite a bit of work in such a short time period.

I'm all for new Napoleonic titles but I just hope that quality does not suffer for the sake of quantity. Time will tell, I guess, and it seems we will have plenty to read this year. Lucky us, eh?

This title seems to be on the same track, but is substituting the work 'lie' for 'truth':

The Lie at the Heart of Waterloo: The Battle's Hidden Last Half Hour Paperback by Nigel Sale.

link

I haven't read this one, so I can't comment on its content.

I have read it twice. It is far better than its title (or cover illustrations) suggests.

If you can overlook what is almost a "conspiracy theory" to belittle the contribution of the 52nd, it is a well thought out analysis of what happened at "the Crisis".

Thanks for the information. I'll put it on my list.